The URL can be used to link to this page

3. Townhomes at Creekside: Conceptual & Preliminary PUD, Site Plan, CUP and Rezoning.CITY OF �,, CHANH SSEN PC DATE: 6/5/96 t ACREAGE: 8/7/96 CC DATE: 8/26/96 ' 9/9/96 CASE #: PUD 96 -3, SP 96 -6, CUP 96 -1 By: Generous:v � STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD - R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots, and associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres; site plan approval for 25 townhome units; and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain; Townhomes at Creekside, Heritage Development. LOCATION: South of Coulter Boulevard and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension APPLICANT: Heritage Development of Minnesota 450 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 (612) 481 -0017 ' PRESENT ZONING: t ACREAGE: DENSITY: ' ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: �a M A2, Agricultural Estate Gross: 28.97 Net (less ROW and Outlot A): 5.79 4.32 units /acre (gross /net) N - A2, Coulter Blvd. S - RSF, Creekside Addition E - A2, Bluff Creek, east branch W - RR/A2, Timberwood Estates WATER AND SEWER: '.Available to the site Action by City Administr&T Endorsed Modified Rejecter q Dat T= ��_ l (� Date Submitted to Commission Date Submitted to Council PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is primarily an open field that slopes from an elevation of 942 in the north to a low of 912 in the south. Steeper slopes exist adjacent to the east branch of Bluff Creek. Existing wooded areas are located adjacent to the east branch of Bluff Creek. A storm water basin, developed as part of the Creekside Addition, is located in the southern portion of the site. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential - Medium Density (Net Density Range 4.0 - 8.0 Units /Ac.) � m At 1 10 1 p offil l I al- MUM 2 a I ff. w x T ffm 0, O Lyman $Soo 8900--- 0006 9100 9200 ITY OF 9300 9400 1THASSEN 9500 9600 9700 SE MAP 9800 9900 IDODO 30100 10200 PROPOSED R/W 10300 ye w ti o� 0 1. C I[ arlm ' Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 ' August 7, 1996 Page 2 1 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY Conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots, and associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 ' townhome units, and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside, Heritage Development. ' The site is bounded on the east and south sides by Bluff Creek which constrains the potential development of the property. In this area, a 100 foot building setback of which the first 50 feet is a buffer area, has been used adjacent to Bluff Creek. A 50 foot building setback is required from Coulter Drive. As part of the revised plans, the applicant is proposing an 80 foot setback in the northeastern corner of the property from Bluff Creek. These setbacks limited the number of units that can be incorporated in the development. ' The ro osed development consists of 25 townhouse units. These units appear very attractive. p P p Building material appears to be vinyl siding with brick and facia accents. Roofs are gabled. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE At the August 26, 1996, City Council meeting, there was a motion to deity the proposed rezoning which failed. A motion to table the item to permit all five council members to review the development was approved. As part of the discussion of the development, alternative types of housing units, at higher densities, were discussed. Staff has included additional attachments that show different unit types that could be located on the property. All through the process, staff has encouraged the developer to provide a unit type that would be environmentally sensitive, yet be within the upper end of the medium density land use (4 - 8 units ' per net acre). In addition, the city has seen a preponderance of single loaded townhome units over the last three years, and was encouraging the development of a different type of housing units. Specifically, staff was interested in a development that would provide a net density ' between 7 and 8 units per acre. Types of units that could meet this requirement are cluster /courtyard single - family detached, stacked row houses, garden apartments, or medium rise stacked units. However, the developer had a particular price point and builder in mind for the ' development, and did not fully investigate these alternatives. If the City Council decides to approve the concept and preliminary PUD staff has prepared the conditions of approval as part of the staff report. Should City Council decide to deny the Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 3 development, staff would recommend that part of the motion include direction to staff to prepare findings of fact. Site Characteristics REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately seven acres from A2 to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development - Residential for a 25 unit, medium density townhome development. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20 -501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Fin clin . The development does preserve the area of the east branch of bluff creek through the provision of a 100 and 80 foot building setback. The applicant has revised the site plan to relocate dwelling units out of the flood plain. In addition, the applicant has reconfigured the eastern layout of units, providing additional view corridors of the natural amenities surrounding the development. L 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 4 Finding. The proposed development efficiently and effectively utilizes the site for development. 3. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The proposed development of medium density residential is an effective transition from the single - family residential to the south and southwest and the office /industrial to the north and east. 4. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The proposed development is consistent with Medium Density Residential Land use. 5. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The proposed development does preserve a 100 foot wide corridor adjacent to Bluff Creek and additional open area is created in the area of the storm water pond. 6. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Findin . Housing in the development will be at market rate. 7. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Findin . Energy conservation would be achieved due to the relaxation of city standards for lot layout and street standards. 8. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Findin . The development will provide all appropriate traffic control devices. Additionally, pedestrian facilities are being required on both sides of Stone Creek Drive. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 5 Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving: Development that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands, trees, and topographical features) More efficient use of land GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE The proposed development consists of 25 townhouse units. The development consists of one two -unit, one three -unit, and five four -unit structures. Buildings are predominantly north -south in orientation The units appear very attractive and provide varied building elevations. Building material appears to be vinyl siding with brick building accents and facia trim. H owever - no * a .;a °a for- re ie... Buildings are 32 feet high to the peak of the roof. The roof elevation provide multiple gabled ends. Covered entrances to units are at the sides of the end units and to the side of the garages. Window treatments include multi -paned rectangular, square, round and half round. SUBDIVISION REVIEW WETLANDS This development is proposing to impact 11,900 square feet of Bluff Creek as part of the Stone Creek Drive extension. Since this project will be extending City utilities to areas along Coulter Boulevard, the City of Chanhassen has assumed responsibility of applying for the necessary permits and creating mitigation areas as required by the Wetland Conservation Act. These permits have been obtained as part of the City's Coulter Boulevard public improvement project (No. 93- 26B). The applicant has submitted a wetland delineation report for the site. The applicant will also be responsible to notify the Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, Bluff Creek Watershed District and any other regulatory agencies who have jurisdiction on Bluff Creek about any proposed changes in the flood plain and/or discharges into the creek. J �I 1 1� Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 6 Bluff Creek - An east and west branch of Bluff Creek comes together at the southeast part of this proposed development and Bluff Creek continues to run north to south through the site. The creek discharges into the Lower Minnesota River approximately three and one -half miles south of the site. The east branch and the main channel of Bluff Creek is a DNR protected water. The City is committed to the protection and restoration of the Bluff Creek corridor and is initiating a comprehensive watershed plan to protect the creek and the corridor associated with it. The City's shoreland ordinance requires that the lowest floor of a structure be placed at least two feet above the highest flood of record, the ordinary high water level, or the level of a technical evaluation conducted to determine the effects of flood stages of the proposed construction. If there is more than one approach used, the highest flood protection elevation determined shall be used for placing structures and other facilities. The watershed district, the City, and the applicant will have to meet to evaluate the methodologies used to determine flood elevations in order to establish a flood elevation for the creek based upon the best available information. Flood plain - The current grading plan shows building pads in the existing flood plain delineation. The grading plan also suggests that the flood plain will change with the Stone Creek Drive extension and construction of the building pads on the south end of the project. If the Bluff Creek flood plain is altered this will require approval from the Bluff Creek Watershed District. Any changes in the flood plain will also require the applicant to notify the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The applicant will be responsible for providing FEMA the necessary documentation to have federal flood plain maps changed to reflect developed conditions. ' Update July 24, 1996 The issues raised in the original report have been addressed in the letter accompanying the plans, but have yet to be resolved. Staff is unclear on how the applicant can alter the floodplain, but use the unaltered border to maintain structures and the building lots outside the floodplain. The ' applicant shall further define, graphically, the proposed floodplain boundary and provide justification for the changes. The Bluff Creek Watershed District has received a set of revised development plans. City staff recommends that we review comments from the Bluff Creek ' Watershed District before final plat approval. City staff has received the delineation report, visited the site, and is comfortable that the new street grade will not impact the wetland northwest of the property. As mentioned in the conditions of approval, no impacts to this wetland shall be allowed and the wetland shall be ' protected during construction. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 7 It is the recommendation of staff that because the development impacts the primary corridor of the Bluff Creek, the applicant should be required to revegetate within the altered floodplain and adjacent to the wetlands with native wetland vegetation to maintain natural features along the creek and establish a consistency in preserving this natural resource. Buffers and Setbacks - The City Wetland Ordinance requires buffer strips for the ag/urban wetlands located on the property. The buffer strip width required for natural wetlands is 10 to 30 feet with a minimum average width of 20 feet. The buffer strip width required for an ag/urban wetland is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback for these wetlands is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City °s wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. Staff recommends that heavy -duty Type III erosion control fencing be installed and maintained along Bluff Creek/wetlands adjacent to where ponding areas are proposed. The erosion control fences shall be maintained until the entire site is fully revegetated and removal is authorized by the City. Staff also recommends that a drainage and utility easement be dedicated over the creek with a minimum width of 30 feet on each side centered along the creek. Bluff Creek is planned as a natural resource corridor from the headwaters to its discharge point at the Minnesota River. Staff has reviewed the upper part of Bluff Creek with the Design Center at the University of Minnesota and recommends a 100 -foot buffer setback to maintain a natural resource corridor as well as a recreational and educational trail corridor. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP serves as a tool to protect, preserve, and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100 -year design storm interval for ponding and a 10 -year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to deter- mine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. 1 �J Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 8 The City requires storm water quantity calculations for pre and post developed conditions and water quality calculations from the applicant prior to final plat. After review of the calculations, the City will make recommendations for approval of the stormwater plan and calculate SWMP fees in accordance with the SWMP. Water Quality The SWMP has established an connection charge for water quality systems. The cash dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. The water quality charge has been calculated at $1,530 /acre for a townhome with 3 to 8 units per acre. This development proposes a net density of 7.03 acres. This equates to a fee of $10,756 for water quantity. It appears the proposed storm water pond has been sized to accommodate runoff from this site; therefore, the storm water quality fee will be waived. Water Quantity The SWMP has established an connection charge for different land uses based on an average, city- wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes all proposed SWMP trunk systems, culverts, and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for temporary runoff storage. Medium density developments will have a connection charge of $2,975 per developable acre. The ' proposed development of 7.03 acres would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $20,914. Credits, if any, will be applied after review of the final construction plans I GRADING The majority of the site is proposed to be graded for house pads, storm water pond and streets. ' According to the plans, no grading activities will occur within 50 feet of the creek except with the extension of Stone Creek Drive. A storm water pond was already created on the south side of the site in conjunction with the Creekside residential subdivision. The plans propose on expanding the ' pond to meet water quality requirements for the area. A large wetland complex exists directly west of this site. The plans propose on filling only a small ' portion at the creek crossing. The proposed street section along Stone Creek Drive has been revised to provide the necessary boulevards adjacent to the curbs for trails and sidewalk. Berms are proposed adjacent to Coulter Boulevard. The proposed street grade along Coulter Boulevard will be approximately 6 feet higher than the first floor of the units on Lots 1 through 12, u Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 9 Block 1. The berms range in height from 8 to 10 feet high along Coulter Boulevard. Additional berming has been proposed to extend through Lot 26 between Lots 10 and 11 to assist in buffering the units from future Coulter Boulevard. The revised grading plan appears acceptable to staff. DRAINAGE A small storm drainage pond was created on this site in conjunction with the applicant's previous phase of development ( Creekside Addition). The pond design has been increased to accommodate storm water runoff from this development. The total drainage area contributing to the pond is approximately 11 acres. Storm sewers will convey runoff to the storm pond for pretreatment prior to discharging into wetlands. The storm sewer plan proposes two storm sewer outlets to discharge into the pond. One discharge point is from Stone Creek Drive (low point) and the other is between Lots 17 and 18, Block 1. These two pipe systems need to be combined. Access for maintenance purposes to the storm sewer between Lots 17 and 18, Block 1 will be very difficult and negatively impact the landscaping and wetlands. By changing street grades slightly and extending approximately 150 l.f. more of storm sewer along street A could eliminate this discharge point. This line would be combined with the proposed storm sewer in Stone Creek Drive. Just one maintenance trip would almost offset the cost of revising the system not to mention eliminate the imposition to the neighborhood. The existing storm sewer in Stone Creek Drive has been revised per staff s recommendation. The storm water quality pond has been revised and designed in accordance with the Walker Pondnet model. Detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 -year and 100 -year storm events along with ponding calculations shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Individual storm sewer calculations between catch basin segments will also be required. The storm water pond has been revised to be constructed with a 1001 bench for the first 10 feet at normal water level and 3:1 slopes thereafter for safety purposes. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site from Stone Creek Drive. The plans propose on extending utilities along Stone Creek Drive to Coulter Boulevard and also into the site. A sanitary sewer line will also be extended through the development to the east edge of the plat for future extension to the adjacent parcel. The sanitary sewer along Stone Creek Drive is one of the City's trunk sewer lines (18 -inch RCP). The plans propose extending an 18 -inch line by the City in conjunction with the Coulter Boulevard improvement. The applicant has petitioned the City to have these utilities extended in conjunction with the Coulter Boulevard improvements. However, depending on the applicant's schedule it maybe more advantageous to have the sewer and water lines installed with this development. The applicant would be credited against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the oversizing cost difference between and 8 -inch lateral sewer line and the 18 -inch trunk sewer line. n ' Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 ' August 7, 1996 Page 10 ' Detailed construction plans and specifications of the utility and street improvements will need to be submitted in conjunction with the final plat approval for staff review and preparation of the development contract. The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. The developer will also need to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee installation of public improvements. ' STREETS ' The plan proposes extending Stone Creek Drive up to Coulter Boulevard. In addition, a private street (Street A) is proposed to service the development. Street A is proposed to be constructed with a 26 -foot wide pavement section and a 45.5 -foot standard radius on the cul -de -sac with concrete curb and gutter. Both of these street widths should accommodate the proposed use. Staff recommends adding one or two more parking stalls to the three proposed west of Lot 25. Due to the number of driveways, parking will be at a premium since there will be no parking on Street A. ' Staff has reviewed the criteria for private streets and believe that this revised proposal complies with city ordinances. The streets will be required to be constructed to meet (7) seven ton per axle 1 weight. Stone Creek Drive is proposed to be constructed in accordance with City standards: 60 foot right - of -way with a 35 -foot wide street section consistent with the existing street. A 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk is proposed along the west side of Stone Creek Drive. An 8 -foot wide bituminous trail is also proposed along a portion of Stone Creek Drive (east side). Staff believes the trail should be extended northerly to Coulter Boulevard to provide a safer pedestrian crossing. PRIVATE STREET FINDINGS In order to permit private streets, the city must find that the following conditions exist: (1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public street. In making this determination, the city may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. (2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to provide a street system consistent with the comprehensive plan. (3) The use of the private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 11 Finding: The prevailing development pattern does not make it feasible or appropriate to construct a public street due to the location of the flood plain and Bluff Creek adjacent to the development. The proposed private street serving the development is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties. The use of the private street does enhance protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas, permitting the location of structures outside of the flood plain. Due to the constraints imposed to preserve the natural amenities surrounding the development and the location of Coulter Drive north of the project, a public street is impractical. MISCELLANEOUS Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) are shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Setbacks. Exterior projections (at overhangs) and exterior walls (at porches) are regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, porches will not be permitted as shown and overhangs will not be permitted in some cases. The property lines should be at least three feet from any overhangs. These requirements are found in UBC Table 5 -A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines, they need to be resolved before preliminary plat approval. Building construction. Unit sizes as shown will require parapets (or compliance with UBC 709.4.1 exceptions 4) or 5) at walls less than three feet from the property line. The structures will be required to be designed by an architect. PARKS AND RECREATION The Parks and Recreation Commission met on May 21, 1996 to review this proposal. The Commission tabled this item for further review. The Park and Recreation Commission met again on June 26, 1996 to review the proposed development. The Commission recommended: 1 ' Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 ' August 7, 1996 Page 12 ' 1. Land within the 50 foot creek setback will be dedicated public property. ' 2. Heritage Development will construct Trail "A" and Connector "A" within the 50 foot setback. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with these trails. Heritage will also be granted park fee credit for the linear area required for these trails based on a calculation of length times 20 feet in width. The proposed plat, at 25 multi - family units, generates a land dedication requirement of two- thirds of an acre. ' 3. Heritage Development will also construct Trail Extension `B" within the right -of -way of Stone Creek Drive. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with this trail. The staking of these trails are to be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to construction. These improvements are to be bid as a unit of the larger public improvement projects being sponsored by the applicant as part of this site work. Upon certification by the city of a low bidder for the trail components, ' said work shall be completed. Upon completion and acceptance of trail components, the applicant shall be reimbursed for engineering and construction costs associated with the trails utilizing trail acquisition and development funds. ' TREE PRESERVATION AND LANDSCAPING ' The existing conditions in the development show minimal tree coverage occurring only along the northern branch of Bluff Creek. According to grading plans, none of these trees will be disturbed by construction. However, since they essentially occur within a wetland area, the canopy coverage is not included for the site. Therefore, the applicant is required to increase coverage in the site in order to meet ordinance. For a medium density development with 19% or less coverage, the base line canopy coverage is 20% or 2 acres. This equates to 81 trees. Applicant has provided 89 trees in the landscaping plan including overstory, understory, and evergreen. According to the plan, the applicant has concentrated the evergreens on the north and east sides of the development and deciduous and shrubs in the central and southern areas. As far as energy conservation plantings and overall layout is concerned, the landscaping is appropriate and will provide adequate buffering from neighbors, streets, and trails in time. ' FINDINGS I Subdivision, Section 18 -39 (fl 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 13 Finding: The proposed subdivision is i -aconsistent with the zoning ordinance. The applicant has proposed a PUD which offers enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development has been revised to incorporate staff recommendations to enhance the design of the project and preserve environmental features. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision of the property for the residential component is consistent with the existing land use designation of the property which is Residential - Medium Density, which was incorporated in the Highway 5 Study. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: While some of the site contains poor soil conditions for development (Cordova silty clay loam and Glencoe silty clay loam) on proposed building sites or roadway, it is possible through soil corrections to make the site suitable for development. As a condition of development, the applicant will be required to incorporate best management practices for erosion control and demonstrate all lots would be buildable. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision attempts to minimize impacts to the environment. While some tree removal and wetland alterations are oftentimes necessary to develop sites through tree preservation measures and the use of smaller right-of-way widths and front yard setbacks, the applicant has reduced potential environmental damage. Fi I Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 14 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Findin : The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. C. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off -site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 5, 1996 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission tabled the item to permit staff and the applicant to review development alternatives for the site that would move building pads out of the flood plain and redesign the eastern end of the development. The Planning Commission held a second hearing on the development on August 7, 1996. The Planning Commission voted three for and one against recommending approval of the development subject to the conditions of approval contained in the staff report and the addition of the following conditions: • Staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units. • Staff shall look at dispersing addition guest parking in the development. • The development shall provide enhanced landscaping in the eastern portion of the site to help screen the development from future office /industrial development to the east. • The applicant shall prepare a foundation planting plan for each unit. The one vote against the project was so that City Council would look at the project in relation to the city's policies and goals relative to the Livable Communities Act, specifically, trying to direct � 11 Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 .August 7, 1996 Page 15 development to higher density within the ranges permitted by the land use designation of the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council grants approval of Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to, Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots, and associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhome units, and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside subject to the following conditions; The applicant will be responsible for applying for and obtaining changes to the FEMA flood plain maps to reflect developed conditions, The applicant shall further define, graphically, the proposed floodplain boundary and provide justification for the changes. 2. The applicant shall notify and obtain a permit from the Bluff Creek Watershed district as needed for the activities of altering a flood plain and discharging storm pond runoff into the Bluff Creek. The city shall review comments from the Bluff Creek Watershed District before final plat approval. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. 4. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements over all utilities, wetlands and ponding areas outside the right -of way. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance of the storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands. 5. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 6. Water quality fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived, Water quantity fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP, Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans. n � L I Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 ' August 7, 1996 Page 16 I 7. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. ' 8. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. ' 9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 -year and 100 -year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality /quantity ponds in ' accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed predeveloped and post - developed storm water calculations for 100 -year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design ' calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. ' 10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army ' Corps of Engineers and MnDOT and comply with their conditions of approval. 12. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. ' On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the lot. ' 13. No ben°ning or landscaping will be allowed within right -of -way areas. ' 14. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of two (2) feet above the high water level calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines. ' 15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc - mulched or wood -fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1996 Page 17 16. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures such as rock construction entrances may be incorporated on the final construction plans. 17. A buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet shall be maintained adjacent to ag/urban wetlands. The principal structure setback shall be 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. 18. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the project boundaries which are adjacent to Bluff Creek and its tributaries. An exception will be made in the northeast corner of the site where an 80 foot setback from the property boundary will be permitted. The applicant shall be required to revegetate within the altered floodplain and adjacent to the wetlands with native wetland vegetation to maintain natural features along the creek and establish a consistency in preserving this natural resource. 19. Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City street standards, i.e. standard boulevards. 20. The storm sewer system shall be redesigned to limit discharge points to one on Stone Creek Drive. 21. If the applicant installs the trunk sanitary sewer, they shall be compensated by means of credits against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8 -inch lateral line and the 18 -inch trunk sewer line. 22. Street A shall be constructed as a private street with a 26 -foot wide street section. 23. The developers and designers should meet with the building official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements 24. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 25. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. J I ' Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 ' August 7, 1996 Page 18 ' 26. If parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking only on one side of the street. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #06 -1991. ' 27. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safety operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9 -1. ' 28. Land within the 50 foot creek setback will be dedicated public property. I 29. Heritage Development will construct Trail "A" and Connector "A" within the 50 foot setback. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with these trails. Heritage will also be granted park fee credit for the linear area required for these trails based on a calculation of length times 20 feet in width. The proposed plat, at 25 multi - family units, generates a land dedication requirement of two - thirds of an acre. 30. Heritage Development will also construct Trail Extension `B" within the right -of -way of Stone Creek Drive. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with this trail. The staking of these trails are to be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to construction. These improvements are to be bid as a unit of the larger public improvement projects being sponsored by the applicant as part of this site work. Upon certification by the city of a low bidder for the trail components, said work shall be completed. Upon completion and acceptance of trail components, the applicant shall be reimbursed for engineering and construction costs associated with the trails utilizing trail acquisition and development funds. 31. Staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units. 32. Staff will review the parking issue. 33. Landscaping shall be enhanced on the east side to improve buffering. 34. The applicant shall submit for approval a foundation planting plan for each unit." ATTACHMENTS Development Review Application Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 August 7, 1 996 Page 19 ! 2. Townhomes at Creekside PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary Plan , 3. Preliminary Site Plan 4. Building Elevations and Floor Plans 5. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List ' 6. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 5/30/96 7. 8. Letter from Joe Richter to Robert Generous dated May 31, 1996 Letter from Kenneth Adolf to Bob Generous dated 7/22/96 9. Public Trail Sketch Plan 10. 11. Planning Commission minutes dated June 5, 1996 Planning Commission Minutes of August 7, 1996 12. "High Density Detached: 15 per Acre," Professional Builder, August 1994. 13. Figure 1- 12, Unit types, densities, and land use efficiency, Sam Davis, Editor, The Form of Housing, 1977, p. 10 ' 14. City Council Minutes of August 26, 1996 g:\pIan\bg\twnhmcrk.doc u FROM :SCHOELL & MADSON 612 546 9065 1996,05 -01 07:S9 #664 P.04/07 RECEIVED MAY 0 9 REC'0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937 -'t ^00 ' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION ' APPLICANT= e ADDRESS: L,'#Ar--- c v p „ lkY7 u TELEPHONE (Day time) '49/ (o 17 CITY OF t:hh1'4nr,00tN OWNER: ��iA ln,E ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit 7 Conditional Use Permit _ Vacation of ROW /Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non- conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development" _ Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign 'D. ^ ppe Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost* ($50 CUP /SPR/VACNARNVAP /Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision" TOTAL FEE $ - I A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8'/2' X 11" roduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract ' NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. FROM :SCHOELL & MRDSON 612 S46 906S 199SIOS -01 08:00 #684 P -OS /07 PROJECT NAME r hh G I"�e(C cfiP LOCATION 1,,,, yb eknot Q"I"' _ �'� nE C.tects- d it I'll -Q . LEGAL DESCRIPTIO : TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT � Z YES NO PRESE ZONING A- REQUESTED ZONING l , D — PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATIt REASON FOR THIS REQUEST ' This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning , Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittals A written , notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application_ This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom , the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. ' will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of I my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing , requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are a rov by the a i nt. Signature piica Date I Signature of Fee Owner Date ' Application Received on Fee Pald Z,�t. Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meetings I It not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailod to the applicant's address n TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAN PREPARED FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA L� May, 1996 Submitted by: Heritage Development 450 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 (612) 481 -0017 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEVELOPMENT TEAM ll. INTRODUCTION III. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location B. Legal Description C. Zoning D. Project E. P.U.D. Criteria F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan /Density 2. Site Utility Availability and Service 3. Traffic Access and Circulation IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULING V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT AND FLOOD PLAIN MITIGATION VIII. TREE PRESERVATION IX. COVENANTS X. CONCLUSION n DEVELOPMENT TEAM The developer of this property is Heritage Development, a Minnesota business located in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Heritage tradition has been synonymous with quality neighborhoods throughout the Metropolitan Area for 10 years. The Development Team is coordinated by John Dobbs, Vice President of Heritage Development and Project Manager of this development. I Consultants c e Planner: The site plan design by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Engineer: The plat and public facilities engineering by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Surveyor: Site surveying by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Wetland Biological Regulated wetland permits, delineation and monitoring by Analysis: Svoboda Ecological Resources of Shorewood, MN Landscape Architecture: Landscape design by Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. 1 II. INTRODUCTION r Purpose of Presentation The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council details of the proposed Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and to obtain the necessary concept plan, preliminary plan and preliminary plat approval with a wetland alteration permit. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT 0 ffl C. ❑C Location z 1 This proposed Residential Planned Unit Development by Heritage is located in Chanhassen in Section 15, Township 116, Range 23. The 5.79 -acre site will be served by Stone Creek Drive to the west, which will connect with Coulter Boulevard. Property to both the north and east remains undeveloped, and has been guided for office /industrial usage by the City's guide plan. To the west is Timberwood Estates single family development, and to the south is Creekside Addition single family residential. Legal Description Parts of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 west of the 5th Meridian. Zoning The project consists of land owned by Heritage Development. The property is currently zoned A -2, Agricultural Estate. The Developer proposes to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development. The Project The project consists of 25 residential townhome units with 2 to 4 units per building that will be developed on lots ranging from 25.5' to 31.0' in width with lot depths of 92.5'. Each lot will accommodate a pre - designed townhome structure. Each home will have a two car garage with a driveway. Twelve of the units will be slab -on -grade with the remainder of the units having walkout basements where topography allows. This site plan was developed in an attempt to maximize the preservation of the natural topography along the creek. Access will be provided by a private cul -de -sac street. The project includes extension of Stone Creek Drive from the Creekside Addition across Bluff Creek and connecting to Coulter Boulevard. Proposed Building Setbacks; 25' Curb Setback Typical along Street "A" 30' Side yard Setback (minimum) along Stone Creek Drive 50' Side and Rear Yard Setback (minimum) along Coulter Boulevard L r 25' Minimum Combined Between Buildings 100' Setback from Center of Creek (minimum) Large wetlands, existing ponding, flood plain, slopes and the natural topography of Bluff Creek create a variety of constraints to development, requiring unique approaches and mitigative efforts aimed at providing quality homesites while maintaining the integrity of the site topography. Measures such as reduced setbacks, road design, and restrictive covenants all contribute to this and will be discussed later. Townhomes will be available in 2, 3, and 4 -unit buildings. The range of ' topography and building mixture provides an opportunity to accommodate different home styles. Besides offering the advantage of a quality streetscape, the mixture of home plans and lot sizes can help the City achieve affordable ' housing goals while maintaining density which is in conformance with R -8 requirements. ' With the difficult constraints on the site, the mitigative measures that we propose, such as preservation of wetlands and Bluff Creek topography with additional ponding, creates a development that is aesthetically pleasing and ' environmentally responsible. These mitigation measures speak to the purpose of the P.U.D. and ' successfully create the ultimate condition that the P.U.D. was designed to affect. I E Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 3 Development Summary Total Acreage R.O.W. Dedication (Stone Creek Drive) R.O.W. Dedication (Coulter Boulevard) Outlot A Net Developable - Residential (Block 1) Number of Units Net Density - Residential Area 28.97 ac. 0.97 ac. 1.22 ac. 20.99 ac. 5.79 25 4.32 units /acre (25 - 5.79) P.U.D. Criteria The Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance (May, 1992) outlines three expected attributes of Planned Unit Developments. Those expected attributes and the Developer's findings are outlined below: Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 4 1. Attribute: The City should be offered enhanced environmental sensitivity beyond normal ordinance requirements. Finding: The overall concept is oriented around the development of an individual neighborhood defined by the road system and the integrated open space system as well as preservation of existing site topography. This community was designed to accommodate moderately - priced townhomes while providing generous amounts of open space. The plentiful open space shown affords the visual amenity provided by ponds, wetlands, berms and creek and combines them with the landscape elements such as grass, flowers, shrubbery and trees. Over and above this, open space provides the means to preserve and enhance existing natural amenities, thus preserving wildlife habitat and groups of existing mature trees. Open space can beneficially influence the micro climate by improving heat radiation and by providing channels for air drainage and favorable air flows. The system operates as more than just open space; it provides a readily accessible place for informal recreation. The Developer has used this process that embraces the delicate balancing act of locating roads and home sites where it has the least effect on the wetland and other topography to create a development that is innovative and harmoniously sensitive to the environment. Z Attribute: The City should be offered sensitive development in transitional areas between different land uses. Lot sizes should be mixed to reflect the sites' environmental limitations and opportunities and to offer a range of housing pricing options. Finding: The proposed plan offers a development which provides sensible transition between land uses. Properties to the south and west contain R -1 single family residential developments, while the properties to the north and east contain industrial /warehouse use facilities or are guided for future office industrial development. This project, utilizing medium density residential concepts, provides transitional land usage between these uniquely different parcels. 3. Attribute: Quality of development in: landscaping, construction quality, provision of public /private open and recreational space. a. Landscaping - By design, the landscape amenities identify the point of arrival to the individual neighborhood. The entrance features will include extensive landscaping and an entry L i� Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 5 ' monument. The cul -de -sac allows development of rolling hills and creates a smaller, more private neighborhood. All areas of ' landscaping will be maintained by a homeowner's association as well as covenants on the land that must be adhered to by owners. ' b. Construction Quality - Heritage Development invests a great deal of time and money periodically upgrading its entire home product line keeping current with design trends that are the most in demand and efficient. The latest innovative construction techniques are implemented upon their introduction to the building industry. Heritage has been developing residential developments ' and building quality homes for 10 years. C. Public and Private Open Space - The amount of open space ' together with the preservation of the creek and the existing ponding within the development are a direct result of the flexibility allowed under a P.U.D. ' d. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes and other minimum requirements ' and performance standards associated with traditional zoning, Planned Unit Developments can maximize the development potential of the developable land while remaining sensitive to its ' unique and valuable natural characteristics. F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan /Density ' The property is currently guided for Medium Density Residential by the City's Land Use Guide Plan. The Heritage property development plan proposes 25 residential townhome units. 1 2. Site Utility Availability and Service Y Y ' The site is within the MUSA. Sanitary sewer and watermain were stubbed into the property during utility extension to serve Creekside ' Addition. 12" PVC sanitary runs south on Stone Creek Drive and Sanitary sewer and watermain would be extended north to serve this site as well as sites to the north, west and east. The storm drainage system on the site consists of storm sewers in streets which will discharge into an existing storm water treatment pond. ' This pond outlets into Bluff Creek. In general, the site drainage pattern is from the north portion of the site to the large pond and creek Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan s 1 in the south and east portion. The drainage facilities will be constructed in connection with the other site improvements. It is the intent of the Developer to maintain private streets. However, sewer and water utilities will be publicly maintained and will be covered by perpetual utility and drainage easements. 3. Traffic and Access Circulation The road system proposed would be privately owned and maintained, and has been developed to best facilitate the movement of traffic safely and conveniently, while at the same time providing a unique neighborhood community consistent with Chanhassen's high standards. Primary access to the development will be off of Stone Creek Drive, which will travel north to Coulter Boulevard. IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULE The Developer intends to develop the project in one phase and will build as the market demands dictate. Obviously, economic conditions may affect the actual time frame and special areas of development. The industrial lots will be sold for future development by others. V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY As the optionee, Heritage intends to develop the property once they receive every governmental approval necessary for development to occur. Heritage is a principal developer in the Twin Cities and has never failed to meet is obligations throughout its history. V1. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS The topography is generally rolling terrain with the highest elevation being 940 feet and the lowest elevation being 912 feet. There exists 0.71 acres of protected wetlands on the site with both the Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Chanhassen having jurisdiction. The 5.79 -acre site is a mix of open space and, along the creek, wetlands with miscellaneous vegetation and some wooded areas. It is bounded to the south and west by Bluff Creek and to the east by the northeast branch of Bluff Creek. The Developer has taken these features into consideration in the planning of this neighborhood community. The area to be graded for development is an open field. 7 r r Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 7 In addition to these natural features, the development will include enhancement of existing wetlands, and along with additional landscape elements proposed by the Developer, we believe the result will be an overall development that is attractive and enduring. VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT The project contains a total of 0.71 acres of wetlands along the creek. Generally, the wetland basins on the project area have been heavily affected by past drainage activities. In some cases, drainage activity has been effective enough to eliminate wetland hydrology, and in others it has rendered historic wetlands so marginal that they serve few, if any, functional wetland values. After extensive analysis and a conscious effort to minimize the development impact ' on the site, approximately 0.32 acres of wetland were found unavoidable and are proposed to be filled. In general, the impacts are associated with the extension of Stone Creek Drive across Bluff Creek.. All of the impacts associated with the project will affect wetlands classified by the City as Ag Urban. Because of the extensive distribution of wetlands present, it is clear that some wetland impacts cannot be avoided. The sedimentation pond will intercept and collect storm water runoff prior to discharging it into the wetlands. The Developer's intent is that upon its completion the site should have equal or greater wetland acreage with overall higher quality than existed prior to development. This should provide an improved variety of plant types and a better habitat for more species of wildlife. Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses shall occur in the form of wetland creation projects adjacent to the wetland in the southwest corner of Outlot A lying approximately 900' south of the residential area and east of Bluff Creek. We have tentatively identified 0.86 acres of potential wetland creation. This site would provide 1:1 acre for acre replacement of wetlands to be affected by the project, including wetland previously disturbed by development, that wetland being altered for the extension of Stone Creek Drive and wetland alteration in Outlot A to accommodate future development. The acreage encompassed by this site is exclusive of storm water storage /treatment ponds to be constructed for this and future projects which are utilized to compensate for the other half of a 2.1 total mitigation package. The wetland would be contiguous to and become part of the existing basin. This basin would be excavated to a depth sufficient to create wet meadow or shallow marsh conditions. In general, the wetland type to be created will provide substantially higher wetland functional value than the degraded wetlands affected by the project. Bottom substrates for the created wetland will consist of organic material excavated from existing wetlands to be affected by the project. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 8 ' A conservation easement will be established around each wetland. The design of this easement shall show a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the easement shall be 10'. This easement, combined with a ' usable backyard of 40', should provide setbacks to the wetland of 50' minimum. The primary purpose of the conservation easement is to provide nesting habitat and wildlife cover peripheral to the wetland. In addition, the easement, combined with the proposed sedimentation ponds, will work together to improve and maintain the character of the wetlands. Many species of wildlife reside in wetlands and depend, in part, on the presence of a fringe of upland habitat. The design of this easement shall depict a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the conservation easement shall vary depending on the classification of the wetland. In addition to wetland impacts, the Developer anticipates that approximately 13.01 acre feet of flood plain will be unavoidably altered. Mitigation for this flood plain loss will occur in the same location as wetland alteration. VIII. TREE PRESERVATION The vast majority of the existing trees along the creek will be subject to minimal or no impact by any home or road construction. There will be little tree loss occasioned by this development, and it is the expressed intention of the Developer to keep tree loss to a minimum. 1X. COVENANTS Protective covenants shall be established and recorded to protect the investment of each homeowner and the wetland conservation easements. In addition, maintenance and protective measures will be addressed by the homeowner's association. X. CONCLUSION Heritage Development feels that the proposed preliminary plan for development of this property enhances the quality goals and objectives of the City of Chanhassen. It is our pleasure to respectfully submit to you our proposal and request your acceptance. I VICINITY MAT' Y I � s __�__� r • • • \ °, \� TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE I -- I K I — • • a • \ � .�. I' _ • a \ \ OWNER /DEVELOPER HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT I °,,• 1 I 450 EAST CNTY ROAD D ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 r••ut• Ir: b T b b _! } ! �* <<� I ENGINEER /SITE PLANNER xl - • i II u „ ,„ SCHOELL & MADISON, INC. 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD V'L L ° N as M is I I 1 MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 iv.,r,u. a ii ail u .�i u Y / �lu ✓ I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW & Ul 300 FIRST AVE. NORTH, SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 I I •rapt � i muLA 0 ! 1 zr.11N.. 1., .N 11II1, .N ;,IIf1i 41 IAILINDAI <r Srrf - EI 4 PkLUra INA<r WAI d HIOSI:_IN i.( Nrr 2L I (AN (.NktN51Ut AUUIT ION d1T n 1'Ih IMiNAkr In TTY rIAN zareu. °urwx r,urlr ¢ uIIC1 �' WI TI AND ,Y rr_ l ( AIN Mrr SrrEEI n PkE iIAl kr lAhUSI.Ai'E RkVISION$ OWNER EVELOPER PROJECT Ni TITLE � SCHOELL � MADISON, INC. / �.aw. 5Ur� D TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE [UT— • """` "r HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - t N n • w lJ /YY 10°•0 WAYUTA 901AEVANO, SUIR 1 AI MAY CHANHASSEN, MN _. .. „ caul eu -rwr ,uow -wroo '. 1 S.M.I. PROJECT NO.61513 -002 SHEET 1 OF 8 SHEETS ji5 F /'n `Jt AC. II 'I I 1 :4 2(I ).r Al A� 1 /4 54 At I wY�u�u Idl 11. AI;1ii 'ul A1_ u�u i r,l I N-II1 4.32 INI `, /.ii_ Y I � s __�__� r • • • \ °, \� TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE I -- I K I — • • a • \ � .�. I' _ • a \ \ OWNER /DEVELOPER HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT I °,,• 1 I 450 EAST CNTY ROAD D ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 r••ut• Ir: b T b b _! } ! �* <<� I ENGINEER /SITE PLANNER xl - • i II u „ ,„ SCHOELL & MADISON, INC. 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD V'L L ° N as M is I I 1 MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 iv.,r,u. a ii ail u .�i u Y / �lu ✓ I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW & Ul 300 FIRST AVE. NORTH, SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 I I •rapt � i muLA 0 ! 1 zr.11N.. 1., .N 11II1, .N ;,IIf1i 41 IAILINDAI <r Srrf - EI 4 PkLUra INA<r WAI d HIOSI:_IN i.( Nrr 2L I (AN (.NktN51Ut AUUIT ION d1T n 1'Ih IMiNAkr In TTY rIAN zareu. °urwx r,urlr ¢ uIIC1 �' WI TI AND ,Y rr_ l ( AIN Mrr SrrEEI n PkE iIAl kr lAhUSI.Ai'E RkVISION$ OWNER EVELOPER PROJECT Ni TITLE � SCHOELL � MADISON, INC. / �.aw. 5Ur� D TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE [UT— • """` "r HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - t N n • w lJ /YY 10°•0 WAYUTA 901AEVANO, SUIR 1 AI MAY CHANHASSEN, MN _. .. „ caul eu -rwr ,uow -wroo '. 1 S.M.I. PROJECT NO.61513 -002 SHEET 1 OF 8 SHEETS SIDE ELEVATION BACK ELEVATION Ylf o V.P iw- T - a' FRONT ELEVATION m w m m m m m m m M m m m m m m mm m m m m m m= m MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN vv.r - or UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN e/r- . r - T fs 1 R, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday, JUNE 5, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive I Project: Townhomes at Creekside I Developer: Heritage Development Location: So. of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 1 outlot, and associated right -of -way, site plan approval for 25 townhome units and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937 -1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on May 23, 1996., Z �� f c - urr . City of Chanhassen c/o City Treasurer 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Bluff Creek Partners 123 N 3rd St. Minneapolis, MN 55401 Hi -Way 5 Partnership c/o Dennis Dirlam 15241 Creekside Ct. Eden Prarie, MN 55344 Chan -Land Partners 200 Hwy 13 W. Burnsville, MN 55337 Shamrock Property Partners 7350 Commerce Ln. Fridley, MN 55432 James I. & Vicky L. Finley 8001 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark J. Foster & Kaern S. Olsson 8020 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 James C. Avis 8190 Galpin Lake Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 McGlynn Bakeries c/o Grand Met Tax Dept 200 S 6th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Richard D. & Mary A. Frasch 8000 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 n MEMORANDUM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 e CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official a h DATE: May 30, 1996 SUBJECT: 96 -3 PUD, 96 -6 SPR, 96 -1 REZ and 96 -1 CUP (Townhomes at Creekside, Heritage Development) I was asked to review the proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, MAY 0 6, 19 9 6, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT.''" for the above referenced project. Analysis: Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building, permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations; is enclosed. Setbacks. Exterior projections (at overhangs) and exterior walls (at porches) are regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, porches will not be permitted as shown and overhangs will not be permitted in some cases. The property lines should be at least three feet from any overhangs. These requirements are found in:UBC Table 5 -A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines, they need to be resolved before`preliminary plat approval. Building construction. Unit sizes as shown will require parapets (or compliance with UBC 709.4.1 ' exceptions 4 or 5) at walls less than three feet from the property line. The structures will be required to be designed by an architect. Bob Generous May 30, 1996 Page 2 I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements Recommendations. The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. 1. Submit street names to the Public Sifety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 2. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 3. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches, This should be done before preliminary plat approval. enclosure: January 29, 1993 memorandum :ls ety\sak\memos \plan \crksdeI I n CITY OF CHANHASSEN ,690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official _ DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might be helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. PLO or RLO Designates Front Lookout or Rear Lookout This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to approximately 4' above the basement floor level ' R Designates Ramblcr. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many level dwellings. SE Designates Split Fury. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Entry Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. wo Designates Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. A ' TU nSE SEWO WO FLO RLO t — -- - - - -- - -=. ' Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building ' plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER L I Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Metro Waters, 12DO Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 -6793 Telephone: (612) 772 -7910 Fax: (612) 772 -7977 Mr. Robert Generous, Senior Planner Planning Department City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE, BLUFF CREEK, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY (CITY #96 -3 PUD, 96 -1 REZ, 96 -6 SPR, and 96 -1 CUP) Dear Mr. Generous: We have reviewed the May 3, 1996 plans for the Townhomes at Creekside (received May 8, 1996) a project located at the intersection of Stone Creek Drive and Coulter Boulevard (SW1 /4 NE1/4, Section 15, T116N, R23W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. Bluff Creek, a Public Water, is on the Townhomes at Creekside site. Any activity, such as placing a stormwater outfall, below the top of the bank of the channel of Bluff Creek which alters its course, current or cross - section, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR permit. Unless the trail crossing of Bluff Creek that is shown already exists, a DNR permit will be required. 2. Wetlands are on the site that are not under DNR Public Waters permit jurisdiction. Townhomes at Creekside may be subject to federal and local wetland regulations. The Department may provide additional comments on Townhomes at Creekside through our review of applications submitted under these other regulatory programs. 3. It appears that the stormwater will be treated in an existing sediment pond, which is good. However, Chanhassen should examine the sediment pond design using Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's guidelines to ensure that the stormwater will be adequately treated. Properly designed sediment ponds will decrease pollution and water level bounces that are detrimental to the aesthetic, recreational, and wildlife values of downstream properties. 4. There should be some type of easement, covenant, or deed restriction for the property adjacent to the wetland and the creek. This would help to ensure that the Townhomes at Creekside Homeowners Association is aware that the DNR, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the City of Chanhassen have jurisdiction over the areas and that they cannot be altered without appropriate permits, DNR Information: 612 -296 -6157, 1 -800- 766 -6000 • TTY: 612 -296 - 5484, 1- 800 -657 -3929 JU 0 3 1996 An EquLd Opportunitc Emplocer 4% Printed on Ree,cled Paper Comeimng ❑ Who Valuc, Dnenin Wo Minimum of 10` � Post- Consurncr CITY OF CHANHASSE',j L i r u n Mr. Robert Generous May 31, 1996 Page 2 5. Heritage Development should be commended for showing the 100 -year flood elevation on the plans. All the work that is done for Townhomes at Creekside must comply with applicable floodplain regulations of both Chanhassen and the Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. 6. Bluff Creek has a shoreland classification of Tributary Stream. The shoreland district extends 300 feet from the top of the bank of the channel of Bluff Creek. Townhomes at Creekside must be consistent with Chanhassen's shoreland management regulations. Variances to the City regulations should be issued only if hardship exists for the applicant. In particular: a. Bluffs (i.e., slopes that average 30 percent or greater and rise 25 feet above the top of the bank) exist along the Northeast Branch of Bluff Creek. We recommend that deed restrictions be placed on the bluffs to ensure that topographic changes or intensive vegetation alterations do not occur. b. Steep slopes occur on the Townhomes at Creekside site. Section 20481(e)5 of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance states that possible soil erosion impacts and development visibility from public waters will be evaluated and conditions will be attached to City permits for the project to prevent erosion and preserve vegetative screening. C. Section 20482(b)(2) of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance requires vegetation and topography to be retained in a natural state in the shore and bluff impact zones. The minimum shore impact zone is a 25' strip along both sides of Bluff Creek. The bluff impact zone is an area within 20' of the top of the bluff. d. The structures of Townhomes at Creekside should be screened from view from Bluff Creek using topography, existing vegetation, color, and other means approved by the City as required by Section 481 of the Chanhassen Shoreland ordinance. 7. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. It typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. b. If construction activities disturb more than five acres of land, the contractor must apply for a stormwater permit from the Iv mesota Pollution Control Agency (Dan Sullivan @ 296 - 7219). Mr. Robert Generous May 31, 1996 Page 3 C. The comments in this letter address DNR - Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772 -7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Joe Richter Hydrologist c: Bob Obermeyer, Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District Gary Elftmann, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Chanhassen Shoreland File Chanhassen Floodplain File f City of Chanhassen c/o Mr. Bob Generous, Senior Planner 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ladies and Gentlemen: Subject July 22, 1996 PUL 2 3 1996 CHANHAZ:xry rL, , i�rl Proposed Townhomes At Creekside, Heritage Development of Minnesota Transmitted herewith are the revised preliminary plans for the proposed Townhomes At Creekside project. The plan revisions have addressed the recommendations contained in the June 5, 1996 staff report and also the Planning Commission's comments. A new topographic survey was completed which shows the as -built location of the stormwater basin. The original flood plain boundary prior to the excavation of the stormwater basin was used for the new site design. This allowed more area in the southeast portion of the site. The previous plan used the flood plain after the construction of the basin. The new site plan shows 25 townhome units. This is the same number and unit type as the previous plan. Heritage Development seriously considered use of wider units which are not as long, but this resulted in loss of more than one -third of the units. This was not financially feasible given the heavy special assessment burden this site will bear. The new plan does not have any units in the flood plain and provides more view corridors from the creek. Schnell & Madson, Inc. Engineers • Surveyors • P /anners Soil Testing • Environmental Services 105BO Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 Minnetonka, MN 55305 -1525 Office 612- 546 -7601 Fax 612- 546 -9065 CITY OF CHANHAq -,F- RGnr r%un 111UU V c r\ UWI i "yuai vrwi LUJ uLy - -t —y– SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. City of Chanhassen 2 July 22, 1996 The Planning Commission asked that the number of recommendations in the staff report, which total 37, be reduced. We consider 17 of the recommendations to be standard recommendations which are used for most projects. These are recommendation Nos. 7 through 21, 33 and 37. Recommendation No. 32 does not apply to this project. The remaining 19 recommendations are addressed as follows: 1. As described above, wider units were considered but found to not be feasible. Stacked units were not considered as it was felt the single family residences to the south and west would oppose such units. 2. Heritage Development has a purchase agreement to sell the eastern side of the development to a developer interested in doing office /commercial /industrial development. 3. The new plan shows no units in the flood plain. Only a small amount of flood plain is filled by embankment slope from a unit. The elevation of Stone Creek Drive has been lowered and the trail has been relocated to the boulevard to minimize the flood plain filling. 4. Applicant agrees to apply and obtain changes to the FEMA flood plain maps. 5. Applicant agrees to obtain Bluff Creek Watershed District approval. 6. The wetland delineation has been done by Franklin Svoboda and Associates and a report will be provided. 22. The applicant is proposing to dedicate the 50' width from the center of the creek to the City for a park. An additional 10 foot wide drainage and utility easement will be provided. 23. All structures will be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the center of Bluff Creek and its tributaries except in the northeast corner of the site. In this corner, it is proposed to reduce the set back to 80 feet on the west side of the creek and to increase the set back to 120 feet on the east side. We understand that the watershed district's rules allow this flexibility and it has been approved for several projects. 24. The new topographic survey and plans show the as -built storm water basin. 25. Stone Creek Drive crosses the creek and adjacent wetlands. The street elevation has been lowered up to over two feet and the trail has been located on the street boulevard. Both adjustments reduce the width of the street embankment and reduce the amount of wetland alteration and flood plain filling. 26. A berm has been added at the recommended location. r I I City of Chanhassen 3 July 22, 1996 27. The two storm sewer discharge points on Stone Creek Drive have been combined. A second discharge is shown from the storm sewer on the east end of the private street as it is not practical to extend storm sewer west to Stone creek Drive. The flood plain elevation is lower on the east side and the units and street, therefore, need to be lower. The east end of the private street cannot be raised to drain to Stone Creek Drive. 28. The plans now show the proposed city sanitary ewer correctly. . Y 29. Given the small size of the parcel and the significant setback requirements on all four sides, it is not feasible to provide for a 60 -foot wide right -of -way and the additional set back requirements from it. A private street is therefore proposed. The cul -de -sac is shown at City standards. Drainage and utility easements will be provided for the sanitary sewer and watermain. 30. The Stone Ceek Dive and Coulter Boulevard right of ways will be dedicated as recommended. This was shown on the previous preliminary plat. 31. The remnant parcel west of Stone Creek Drive will be included in the Stone Creek Drive right of way. 34. The dwelling pads now show the standard designations. 35. The proposed townhouse lots show the property line a minimum of 5 feet outside of the decks and other projections. 36. The street width is now shown at 28 feet. We trust the revised plans, additional information, and above response will allow you to proceed with the approval process. Please contact us with any questions. KEA/cj enc. cc: John Dobbs, Heritage Development SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. FE M �/ - M/ A Kenneth Adolf TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAN PREPARED FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA May, 1996 Revised July 22, 1996 Submitted by: Heritage Development 450 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 (612) 481 -0017 s TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEVELOPMENT TEAM II. INTRODUCTION III. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location B. Legal Description C. Zoning D. Project E. P.U.D. Criteria F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan /Density 2. Site Utility Availability and Service 3. Traffic Access and Circulation IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULING V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT AND FLOOD PLAIN MITIGATION VIII. TREE PRESERVATION IX. COVENANTS X. CONCLUSION 1. DEVELOPMENT TEAM The developer of this property is Heritage Development, a Minnesota business located in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Heritage tradition has been synonymous with quality neighborhoods throughout the Metropolitan Area for 10 years. The Development Team is coordinated by John Dobbs, Vice President of Heritage Development and Project Manager of this development. Consultants Planner: Engineer: Surveyor: Wetland Biological Analysis: Landscape Architecture II. INTRODUCTION Purpose of Presentation The site plan design by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN The plat and public facilities engineering by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Site surveying by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Regulated wetland permits, delineation and monitoring by Svoboda Ecological Resources of Shorewood, MN Landscape design by Dahigren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council details of the proposed Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and to obtain the necessary concept plan, preliminary plan and preliminary plat approval with a wetland alteration permit. L 7 i Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan P P rY C J Ill. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location This proposed Residential Planned Unit Development by Heritage is located in Chanhassen in Section 15, Township 116, Range 23. The 5.79 -acre site will be served by Stone Creek Drive to the west, which will connect with Coulter Boulevard. Property to both the north and east remains undeveloped, and has been guided for office /industrial usage by the City's guide plan. To the west is Timberwood Estates single family development, and to the south is Creekside Addition single family residential. B. Legal Description K, Parts of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 west of the 5th Meridian. C. Zoning The project consists of land owned by Heritage Development. The property is currently zoned A -2, Agricultural Estate. The Developer proposes to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development. D. The Project The project consists of 25 residential townhome units with 2 to 4 units per building that will be developed on lots ranging from 25.5' to 31.0' in width with lot depths of 92.5'. Each lot will accommodate a pre- designed townhome structure. Each home will have a two car garage with a driveway. Twelve of the units will be slab -on -grade with the remainder of the units having walkout basements where topography allows. This site plan was developed in an attempt to maximize the preservation of the natural topography along the creek. Access will be provided by a private cul -de -sac street. The project includes extension of Stone Creek Drive from the Creekside Addition across Bluff Creek and connecting to Coulter Boulevard. Proposed Building Setbacks: 22' Minimum Curb Setback Typical along Street "A" 30' Side yard Setback (minimum) along Stone Creek Drive 50' Side and Rear Yard Setback (minimum) along Coulter Boulevard Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 20' Minimum Combined Between Buildings 100' Setback from Center of Creek typical. 80' setback in northeast corner of site with 120 feet on the opposite side of creek for a total width of 200 feet.. Large wetlands, existing ponding, flood plain, slopes and the natural topography of Bluff Creek create a variety of constraints to development, requiring unique approaches and mitigative efforts aimed at providing quality homesites while maintaining the integrity of the site topography. Measures such as reduced setbacks, road design, and restrictive covenants all contribute to this and will be discussed later. Townhomes will be available in 2, 3, and 4 -unit buildings. The range of topography and building mixture provides an opportunity to accommodate different home styles. Besides offering the advantage of a quality streetscape, the mixture of home plans and lot sizes can help the City achieve affordable housing goals while maintaining density which is in conformance with R -8 requirements. With the difficult constraints on the site, the mitigative measures that we propose, such as preservation of wetlands and Bluff Creek topography with additional ponding, creates a development that is aesthetically pleasing and environmentally responsible. These mitigation measures speak to the purpose of the P.U.D. and successfully create the ultimate condition that the P.U.D. was designed to affect. Development Summary Total Acreage R.O.W. Dedication (Stone Creek Drive) R.O.W. Dedication (Coulter Boulevard) Outlot A Net Developable - Residential (Block 1) Number of Units Net Density - Residential Area E. P.U.D. Criteria 28.97 ac. 0.97 ac. 1.22 ac. 20.99 ac. 5.79 25 4.32 units /acre (25 . 5.79) The Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance (May, 1992) outlines three expected attributes of Planned Unit Developments. Those expected attributes and the Developer's findings are outlined below: J 1 1 Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 4 1. Attribute: The City should be offered enhanced environmental sensitivity beyond normal ordinance requirements. Findinq: The overall concept is oriented around the development of an individual neighborhood defined by the road system and the integrated open space system as well as preservation of existing site topography. This community was designed to accommodate moderately - priced townhomes while providing generous amounts of open space. ' The plentiful open space shown affords the visual amenity provided by ponds, wetlands, berms and creek and combines them with the landscape elements such as grass, flowers, shrubbery and trees. 0 Over and above this, open space provides the means to preserve and enhance existing natural amenities, thus preserving wildlife habitat and groups of existing mature trees. Open space can beneficially influence the micro climate by improving heat radiation and by providing channels for air drainage and favorable air flows. The system operates as more than just open space; it provides a readily accessible place for informal recreation. The Developer has used this process that embraces the delicate balancing act of locating roads and home sites where it has the least effect on the wetland and other topography to create a development that is innovative and harmoniously sensitive to the environment. 2. Attribute: The City should be offered sensitive development in transitional areas between different land uses. Lot sizes should be mixed to reflect the sites' environmental limitations and opportunities and to offer a range of housing pricing options. Finding: The proposed plan offers a development which provides sensible transition between land uses. Properties to the south and west contain R -1 single family residential developments, while the properties to the north and east contain industrial /warehouse use facilities or are guided for future office industrial development. This project, utilizing medium density residential concepts, provides transitional land usage between these uniquely different parcels. 3. Attribute: Quality of development in: landscaping, construction quality, provision of public /private open and recreational space. a. Landscaping - By design, the landscape amenities identify the point of arrival to the individual neighborhood. The entrance features will include extensive landscaping and an entry Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan monument. The cul -de -sac allows development of rolling hills and creates a smaller, more private neighborhood. All areas of landscaping will be maintained by a homeowner's association as well as covenants on the land that must be adhered to by owners. b. Construction Quality - Heritage Development invests a great deal of time and money periodically upgrading its entire home product line keeping current with design trends that are the most in demand and efficient. The latest innovative construction techniques are implemented upon their introduction to the building industry. Heritage has been developing residential developments and building quality homes for 10 years. C. Public and Private Open Space - The amount of open space together with the preservation of the creek and the existing ponding within the development are a direct result of the flexibility allowed under a P.U.D. d. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes and other minimum requirements and performance standards associated with traditional zoning, Planned Unit Developments can maximize the development potential of the developable land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. I Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan /Density The property is currently guided for Medium Density Residential by the City's Land Use Guide Plan. The Heritage property development plan proposes 25 residential townhome units. 2. Site Utility Availability and Service The site is within the MUSA. Sanitary sewer and watermain were stubbed into the property during utility extension to serve Creekside Addition. 12" PVC sanitary runs south on Stone Creek Drive. Sanitary sewer will be extended on Stone Creek Drive under the City's Coulter Boulevard project. Watermain will be extended north to Coulter Boulevard. The storm drainage system on the site consists of storm sewers in streets which will discharge into a relocated and expanded storm water treatment pond. This pond outlets into Bluff Creek. In general, the site drainage pattern is from the north portion of the site to the large pond and creek in the south and east portion. The drainage 0 1 I n [I Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan facilities will be constructed in connection with the other site improvements. It is the intent of the Developer to maintain private streets. However, sewer and water utilities will be publicly maintained and will be covered by perpetual utility and drainage easements. 3. Traffic and Access Circulation The road system proposed would be privately owned and maintained, and has been developed to best facilitate the movement of traffic safely and conveniently, while at the same time providing a unique neighborhood community consistent with Chanhassen's high standards. Primary access to the development will be off of Stone Creek Drive, which will travel north to Coulter Boulevard. IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULE ' The Developer intends to develop the project in one phase and will build as the market demands dictate. Obviously, economic conditions may affect the actual time frame and special areas of development. The industrial lots will be sold for future development by others. ' V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY As the optionee, Heritage intends to develop the property once they receive every governmental approval necessary for development to occur. Heritage is a principal developer in the Twin Cities and has never failed to meet is obligations throughout its history. ' VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS The topography is generally rolling terrain with the highest elevation being 940 feet and the lowest elevation being 912 feet. There exists 0.71 acres of protected wetlands on the site with both the Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Chanhassen having jurisdiction. ' The 5.79 -acre site is a mix of open space and, along the creek, wetlands with miscellaneous vegetation and some wooded areas. It is bounded to the south and west by Bluff Creek and to the east by the northeast branch of Bluff Creek. The Developer has taken these features into consideration in the planning of this neighborhood community. The area to be graded for development is an open field. 0 Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan p p rY 7 In addition to these natural features, the development will include enhancement of existing wetlands, and along with additional landscape elements proposed by the Developer, we believe the result will be an overall development that is attractive and enduring. VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT The project contains a total of 0.71 acres of wetlands along the creek. Generally, the wetland basins on the project area have been heavily affected by past drainage activities. In some cases, drainage activity has been effective enough to eliminate wetland hydrology, and in others it has rendered historic wetlands so marginal that they serve few, if any, functional wetland values. projects which are utilized to compensate for the other half of a 2.1 total mitigation After extensive analysis and a conscious effort to minimize the development impact on the site, approximately 0.32 acres of wetland were found unavoidable and are ' proposed to be filled. In general, the impacts are associated with the extension of Stone Creek Drive across Bluff Creek.. All of the impacts associated with the project will affect wetlands classified by the City as Ag Urban. Because of the extensive distribution of wetlands present, it is clear that some wetland impacts cannot be avoided. The sedimentation pond will intercept and collect storm water runoff prior to discharging it into the wetlands. The Developer's intent is that upon its completion the site should have equal or greater wetland acreage with overall higher quality than ' existed prior to development. This should provide an improved variety of plant types and a better habitat for more species of wildlife. Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses shall occur in the form of wetland creation projects adjacent to the wetland in the southwest corner of Outlot A lying approximately 900' south of the residential area and east of Bluff Creek. We have tentatively identified 0.86 acres of potential wetland creation. This site would provide 1:1 acre for acre replacement of wetlands to be affected by the project, including wetland previously disturbed by development, that wetland being altered for the extension of Stone Creek Drive and wetland alteration in Outlot A to accommodate future development. The acreage encompassed by this site is exclusive of storm water storage /treatment ponds to be constructed for this and future projects which are utilized to compensate for the other half of a 2.1 total mitigation package. The wetland would be contiguous to and become part of the existing basin. This basin would be excavated to a depth sufficient to create wet meadow or shallow ' marsh conditions. In general, the wetland type to be created will provide substantially higher wetland functional value than the degraded wetlands affected by the project. Bottom substrates for the created wetland will consist of organic material excavated from existing wetlands to be affected by the project. - 1 Ll Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 8 A conservation easement will be established around each wetland. The design of this easement shall show a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the easement shall be 10'. This easement, combined with a usable backyard of 40', should provide setbacks to the wetland of 50' minimum. The primary purpose of the conservation easement is to provide nesting habitat and wildlife cover peripheral to the wetland. In addition, the easement, combined with the proposed sedimentation ponds, will work together to improve and maintain the character of the wetlands. Many species of wildlife reside in wetlands and depend, in part, on the presence of a fringe of upland habitat. The design of this easement shall depict a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the conservation easement shall vary depending on the classification of the wetland. In addition to wetland impacts, the Developer anticipates that approximately 12 acre feet of flood plain will be unavoidably altered. Essentially all of the flood plain filling results from the Stone Creek Drive construction. Mitigation for this flood plain loss will occur in the area of the on -site storm water basin with the balance provided in the same location as wetland mitigation. VIII. TREE PRESERVATION The vast majority of the existing trees along the creek will be subject to minimal or no impact by any home or road construction. There will be little tree loss occasioned by this development, and it is the expressed intention of the Developer to keep tree loss to a minimum. IX. COVENANTS Protective covenants shall be established and recorded to protect the investment of each homeowner and the wetland conservation easements. In addition, maintenance and protective measures will be addressed by the homeowner's association. X. CONCLUSION Heritage Development feels that the proposed preliminary plan for development of this property enhances the quality goals and objectives of the City of Chanhassen. It is our pleasure to respectfully submit to you our proposal and request your acceptance. d p TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE OWNER /DEVELOPER HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 450 EAST COUNTY ROAD D ZONING, OFFICE INDUSTRIAL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 66997 _ \\ -.. RROIrosrP PR�°cr ENGINEER /SITE PLANNER /SURVEYOR t o IBY O THERBI m °11.r°s 5 10580 WA ZATA BLVD. MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 8 o NAGr Arvo - DAHLOREN, SHARDLOW 8 UBAN 1 0 E ul ry re slmrvl - 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 210 <) m <T BLOCK ! - -__ — - — - _ - - -' MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 65401 4 - oau`rr TWO umm _, P � -- _ I T = ° r�sI�IN� - 1 • 9 • s � I IS i to \ 1 I I t CU 1 -._ 90 aAR � wE °olcvsnec) � - uN�N� *SITE - IENG I 1 ! —t°° „ m GAI vmm°51R v.Uli� rvlrtR d -� � W T qq��''TT� _. _ �t rb -� - Q \� � • I _ SI - g I � I 13 I. = R- el) 1 A A ( 13 1 F19KV I V IRO I r C� I I o ANP GJ R : I I w o I a• 24 33 H as L I 1 1 w OUTLOT B ! �1 �"c� IR "im ^�.7 I sunvana t1 )s PR I o - / \ µovcREtE c - to ( _ . - I - , -t_ I I I I ° °NIITP VICINITY MAP co rsNUU - - -� - ( �N� I . l- >M » i , B i I BLOCK.1 \ \ M to I 1 ' 1 Iv„Iw;N ANO u LEGEND )11111 ZONING, SINOLE FAMILY I 1 IAS1 I Im•�ru j ` \ \ [ I ; I 1)I Nllil � NNANAGI ,y 1 v (A;[MI NI IINtS I U \ / 111 Nf)1Eti II)GI III WI II AN11 � 8 EXISTING 90M,� y _ __ -__ _. - -. _- INNIIIIS SIIIIACH I'll DEVELOPMENT DATA OUTLOT A I\ I / \ TOTAL SITE AREA 1,202,210 •.F. /78.97 AC. OUTLOT A AREA OUTLOT B AREA 914,200 BF. /20. O N - _ R O DEDICATION .F./ .1 . -� \ / cr rvlERl vE PLATTED IDIOTS (LOTS 1.251 62.009 ,F.% 4 AC. - COMMON LLOT 201 1 P./ . AC TOTAL TOWNHOU D[YELOPMENT AREA M1,43,43 7 B F. /4 .8 00 ACC . T1 I I \, \ — RlroROS[n e' \ \ \ TOTAL TS 1- AND OUTLOT AT 20 NET DENSITY 4.31 UNIT PER ACRE INDEX OF SHEETS - �mcµ E.�snric I I �� \r n(rn•rA�, SNEET 9 PRELIMINARY SITE PUN I I I \ \ \ SHEET 8 EXISTING CONDITIONS ZONINOy/ SINGLE FAMILY \ •MEET 3 000NDARY SURVEY / \ SHEET 4 PAELIMINARY PLAT ��l� \ \ SHEET 5 PRELIMINURY ORADINO, DRAINAGES - pT J \ EROBIOAT CONTROL PLAN SH[•T S PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN srwlE m r[rl SHEET 7 WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN 8HEET B PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN REVISIONS SCHOELL do MADSON, INC. OWNE /OEELO R VrFR PROJFCT NAME /SIIEF.T TITLE an V. IaMSOe er ,"• ,9R ",° r °N• ^^ "� a v "Nr wl. ENG rvEUtS SV[NEYMS RIArvrvERS PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN )0) 96 ml RI VSEO IRI —1 2_I a sal IESRNC . EWRONUENT4 S[Wr[5 -- — - IPS6o WAV)AIA 1?01 AMP. suITF I HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT 1996 TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE M1, W` "° �1NNFI°NA.wry 6e P1 CHANHASSEN MINNESOTA 1 S.M.I. PROJFCT N0, 61513 007 SIIEFT I OF 8 SHFFIS wA ww we �w ww ww �w ww �w ■w w iww r w w w w _ ww 11 f IM IHH !!l1H/f AI fOtll Co•10AvSG i O, ��o I � I wia[m ut r wt... I I mot•, - - -- 1 � n , 7; ��}itr'' a2 1p n ,r � r J tw tr rrwa w nn REVISIONS os °"dL°.:.::� SC . INC. ELL h MADSON INC P* ww - nw�r w _ owHER /o[oc1oPE mcT [ /SHEET UTLE TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE " 1�1I WI I li<NR�I �lW jp� �ytwC . [MMgr(MIM 1f11MCI�7 — — low -1Z11,pw(yyr,,yt[f HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN CHANHASSEN, MN wtiw•R M I (•IJI 1.••Iwl //�.M••f011 OAT MAY 1996 S.M.I. PROJECT NO.61513-DO2 SHEET 5 OF 7 SHEETS 1, Nil Mat s \ Co•10AvSG i O, ��o I � I wia[m ut r wt... I I mot•, - - -- 1 � n , 7; ��}itr'' a2 1p n ,r � r J tw tr rrwa w nn REVISIONS os °"dL°.:.::� SC . INC. ELL h MADSON INC P* ww - nw�r w _ owHER /o[oc1oPE mcT [ /SHEET UTLE TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE " 1�1I WI I li<NR�I �lW jp� �ytwC . [MMgr(MIM 1f11MCI�7 — — low -1Z11,pw(yyr,,yt[f HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN CHANHASSEN, MN wtiw•R M I (•IJI 1.••Iwl //�.M••f011 OAT MAY 1996 S.M.I. PROJECT NO.61513-DO2 SHEET 5 OF 7 SHEETS Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 , PUBLIC HEARING: CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL ' FOR A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 7.03 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF COULTER BOULEVARD, AND EAST OF STONE CREED DRIVE EXTENSION, REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD -4, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 26 LOTS, 1 OUTLOT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT- OF-WAY, SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 25 TOWNHOME UNITS AND A CONDITION USE PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND FILLING WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN, TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE, HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. Public Present: I Name Address Richard Frasch 8000 Acorn Lane John Dobbs 645 5th Avenue Bob Generous resented the staff re oit on this item. , P P Peterson: Questions of staff. I have one Bob. If you could just talk through a little bit on ' issue number 1 with the addition of environmental features to be achieved through mixing of unit types. Walk me through a little bit better idea of what you mean by that. Is it wider units and not as long but? Generous: Well, all these units are basically, I can't remember the dimensions. They are narrow and long, which has made them a little squaterly. They might fit in a little bit better and give you bigger setbacks. Another idea is to single... Put the roadway on one side and all the units on the other. So there are alternate designs that we might be able to work with and that way we create a, potentially a better view corridor here and the fronts of these units looking out over to this larger expanse of wetland area. That is something that we don't have. We have tried something similar to that as a part of the Creekside Addition. It just didn't work out but it creates more of a public space and Bluff Creek and the storm water pond that they're creating. Could also build two level units where you have a lower and an upper. There's a potential that since he is at the low end of the density, he could get an additional I density to make it work financially for this project to go forward. Peterson: So you're not necessarily saying changing every unit but more of a mix. Having , some longer, some multi- level. Generous: Yes. Fit it into the site a little better. I i I, Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 Peterson: Other questions for staff? Is the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If you would state your name and address please. John Dobbs: My name is John Dobbs with Heritage Development Company, 645 5th Avenue... I was here with the Creekside project and there were a number of ideas kicked around about how to, an alternative type of neighborhood that Bob mentioned be worked out. What we've tried to do with this one is, there were a number of issues that came up for a 7 acre parcel as we moved through, and I was at Park and Rec the other night and I actually asked to get tabled so some of those issues could be worked out. In particular which side of the creek the west /east branch... The price point of the Creekside subdivision is essentially $280,000.00 and up for single family homes so what we did intentionally was we tried to set up trying to build our end product that would make a higher density but price point was applicable to what was going on to the south, which is the Creekside Subdivision... So what we did ... and as you read this, you read the staff report and I think everybody... It's a very nice building and it has the potential to be two streets, 40 units. The problem with a private drive versus going public, Ken Adolf from Schoell and Madsen is our engineer and he talked about that a little bit but I guess what we did is we intentionally set off to have a little bigger unit that was a little bit more... trying to fit something that would fit something that would fit in to what was going on inside and also was going on in terms of the prices ... the 50 foot setback from the creek exists as code now. We are 100 feet back from the center line of the creek. Todd Hoffman and I, the Park and Rec, and there's a letter that he wrote to me and I would imagine when we come back you will see there is ... 50 feet from the center line of the creek over to the... The problem with, that I have with the comments made by Mr. Generous is that there's also an issue about the financial aspects associated with the project. The road that runs north /south, Stone Creek Drive is going to be put in and funded entirely by this 25 unit project. We're also going to end up being assessed for Coulter Boulevard, which is going through. Those two numbers together are going to be fairly large for a 25 unit project. So doing a one sided road or those are the kind of ideas, all design wise and aesthetically would be very nice. Plus an economic reality about whether this project can actually financially sustain so there are some real... economic issues and on one side, we already have the one side of the street here. Just to get up to Coulter Boulevard and then there would be the assessment for how Coulter Boulevard comes through. This way ... so there are some real issues associated with that so it's... I'd be happy to answer any questions and maybe Ken can speak to those right -of -way issues for a public road versus a private. Ken Adolf: Mr. Chair, members of the commission. I'm Ken Adolf with Schoell and Madson. We're the consulting engineers and planners to the applicant. This is going to be the site plan that was submitted with the application on which in red we've shown the setbacks. We've got the 100 foot setback from the creek. The main branch of the creek is actually down here and there's a storm water basin that's been constructed on the north side of 5 Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 , �I that. So that's, that would be expanded to also service this development. So this indicates, what's shown on there is what would be the flood elevation of that storm water basin. In addition to what's shown here in red, there's a relatively significant change in elevation from ' the water elevation in the storm water basin up to where the units would be and then there's elevation change continues on up to the proposed elevation for Coulter Boulevard so the street needs to, and the units need to kind of fit in. I've got some elevation inbetween Coulter Boulevard and the existing pond creek. You can see that the site is fairly constrained here in the north /south direction and that was really the reason that we went with the private , driveway because it allows the units to be pulled closer together as compared to a public street with a 60 foot wide right -of -way, which was recommended in the staff report and there's front setback requirements from there which has a tendency to really push the units apart to a point that it almost ends up being a single loaded street. This also shows his street connection 300 feet south of Coulter which again pushes it south more so there really isn't enough space on the south side of the street to put anything in there. So that's just kind of a sketch to indicate what the additional constraints that result from a public street with the resulting front yard setbacks. , John Dobbs: And if I could, I'd just like to follow -up. We came tonight knowing that there were a lot of issues and that this item would probably be tabled and we're okay with that. It would be nice obviously, if there's a lot of issues, that we have some general direction as to what's... would be very helpful. The problem, as I'm a developer and ... the problem with doing a series of custom buildings on this project, these 25 units becomes problematic for the builder to re- design. Figure out ... in terms of entry and product type for each individual... so ' they, builders tend to try to keep that to a minimum and at the same time ... nice exterior and very nice ... So it'd just be helpful to get some direction and know where we're going and... I'd be happy to answer any other questions. Peterson: Thank you staff. I know we've got 37 points for you to address, which is sizeable , in and of itself. If you could maybe summarize what some of your major issues are so that when you're asking for direction, and we can empathize with that. John Dobbs: Sure. I guess my big, the big direction would be that, whether it would be private or public as a drive and the reason for private would simply be to try to work with a very constrained piece of property. We are trying to put a product in that I think is a price , point for the area based on what we're doing at Creekside. It's probably fairly acceptable... and density isn't very large. Just under the 3.5 -3.6 units an acre I think. Almost... If this product isn't acceptable with the constraints of a public road comes in, we'll probably have to , go with a denser, more vertical, small type of unit. We tried to work with the economics of the site ... Also get some direction on the product and the density and private versus public road. We'd also try to leave it as green as we can. Again there's a lot of green space on the I 6 1 Ll P Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 end and as ... remember with the Creekside site, there was a little discussion about parkland and that kind of thing. I think actually this time Todd Hoffman and I have come a long ways ... and worked all that stuff out. I think it will be a nice addition to the corridor... Peterson: Any other questions for the applicant? Hearing none, may I have a motion to open this for a public hearing. Conrad moved, Skubic seconded to open the public hewing. The public healing was opened. Peterson: Anyone wishing to address the Commission regarding this matter? State your name and address please. Richard Frasch: My name is Richard Frasch. I live at 8000 Acorn Lane. My land would be contiguous. My lot would be contiguous to this development. To me conceptually I don't know first hand the economics necessarily. We have these large lot properties right to the west of it. We've Stone Creek to the southwest. You've got Creekside, which are real nice homes there. I really do not want to see townhomes there. I'd prefer to see single family dwellings and I think that makes for a better transition and quite frankly I just think that townhomes, particularly as you drive through some of the other cities like Eden Prairie or Edina, they don't put a very good face on the city driving through it and I would prefer to see the Planning Commission not recommend this and rather have this move towards a single family dwelling so it would be comparable to the homes at either Creekside or Stone Creek. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Commission? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing. Com -ad moved, Mehl seconded to close the public hewing. The public hewing was closed. Peterson: Bob. Any comments regarding this? Skubic: Well could you move on and come back to me. I'd like to collect my thoughts here a little bit. Peterson: Kevin, you're on the hot seat. Joyce: Well I definitely think it should be tabled. I don't have any problems with putting townhomes in there. It's not a huge development. You know I think conceptually they look rather nice. It'd be a nice transition from what's there right now to the townhome development. But as far as the plan itself, I think it has some work to be done. I don't understand this building site 14 and 13 being off like that. That I have a problem with. No 7 Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 access to that or using some sort o£..driveway there. I think that, I kind of agree with Bob Generous. I think you could widen these things and have them fit into this space. So I'd like to look at it further but I'd like to table it. I'm not opposed to it but I think there's definitely some work to be done and I think you could probably fit the building and that's really where I'm going from. Peterson: Thanks. Ladd. Conrad: I'm okay with the townhome concept here. I think it's fine. I like the product. It's really an economic issue. Does it fit? And it's really terribly difficult to give direction tonight. I mean that's what we should do but it's terribly difficult. It's easier to come to a bottom line on direction by saying we've got to reduce the 37 points out there and something that we can deal with. I can't deal with 37 points. I'm not saying cutting it down to 2 or 3 but we've got to reduce that I think I heard Bob say some things that given we move some things around, we probably could justify a private drive, and I think you've got to work towards that. Bottom line to me is, it does get tabled. It doesn't work right now. It has potential to work. Still may not be financially feasible but I think I've got to dump it off on staff and say, you've really got to work with staff on this one. Bottom line, I think townhomes are fine there. I like the product look. I empathize with the developer. It's hard to change designs through the project. It seems simple but it's hard... different things together or whatever it might be but again I think you just have to work with staff on this one and that's much direction but I think staffs comments are valid and I'd support them tonight. Peterson: Thanks. Don. Mehl: I agree architecturally it's shown us a good product. It looks good on all four sides of the building. But I also agree here we've got a lot of points that staffs concerned with and we are, I think we need to table it to allow them to work those out. Peterson: Thank you. Bob, Skubic: Well the applicant pointed out that there were constraints on here. I can understand the difficulty ... I understand the general concept... The private driveway, if that's what's required, I'm okay with that. I'll go with what staff recommends on that. Peterson: Dave, I've got a question for you. Can you give me some sense as to how onerous a public road would be with that small of a development? Hempel: Well 25 units, it's not all that small. I guess staff isn't totally opposed to a private street as long as we can see some benefit from a private street, We've got three conditions 1 F, C I I J Planning Commission Meeting - June 5, 1996 that have to be met to warrant it and if we don't meet those, we could be setting a precedent for future developments as well. With this layout here it works to the developer's benefit with a private street to lay out the units. I guess I can't justify it based on meeting the three points listed in the ordinance. Aanenson: If I could just add to that. I guess what we see as the environmental feature here is the creek and we're not sure that this, this is the product he's chosen for this property. We're saying that we're not sure that this layout does the best justice for the creek. That is the feature that we are trying to preserve right now. So would we support a private drive if we're working on the best to save the creek? Probably, but we're not sure we're there yet and that's what we're trying to work through. Peterson: And my comments parallel the rest of the commissioners in that I think the townhouse idea, at that level as far as cost. I mean you have the opportunity to make some fine, build some fine properties that can only add to the neighborhood and certainly enhance it. Maybe not decrease not certainly enhance the neighborhood so I concur that they work with staff to find a solution. So with that, may I have a motion. Conrad: I'd make a motion that the Planning Commission table this PUD 996 -3 and SP #96 -6 and CUP #96 -1 per the condition, going along with the conditions in the staff report. Peterson: Is there a second? ' Joyce: Second. ' Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Conrad moved, Joyce seconded to table the conceptual and preliminary planned unit development, PUD 496 -3, Site plan 496 -6 and Conditional Use Permit #96 -1 to address the concerns and issues of staff. All voted in favor- and the motion carried. we NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday, August 7, 1996 at 8:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive Project: Townhomes at Creekside Developer: Heritage Development Location: So. of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots, and associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres site plan approval for 25 townhome units and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937 -1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on July 25, 1996. C ' .s 1 C ity of Chanhassen Hi -Way 5 Partnership c/o City Treasurer c/o Dennis Dirlam 9 90 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 15241 Creekside Ct. hanhassen, MN 55317 Eden Prarie, MN 55344 luff Creek Partners 23 N 3rd St. Minneapolis, MN 55401 hamrock Property Partners 11 350 Commerce Ln. Fridley, MN 55432 James I. & Vicky L. Finley 001 Acorn Ln. hanhassen, ININ 55317 i Chan -Land Partners 200 Hwy 13 W. Burnsville, MN 55337 Mark J. Foster & Kaern S. Olsson 8020 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 James C. Avis 8190 Galpin Lake Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 McGlynn Bakeries c/o Grand Met Tax Dept 200 S 6th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Richard D. & Mary A. Frasch 8000 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 7, 1996 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Mancino, Craig Peterson, Bob Skubic and Jeff Farmakes MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad and Kevin Joyce STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; John Rask, Planner I; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II; and Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 7.03 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF COULTER BLVD. AND EAST OF THE STONE CREEK DRIVE EXTENSION, REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD -R, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 25 LOTS 1 OUTLOT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT -OF -WAY, SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 25 TOWNHOME UNITS AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND FILLING WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN, TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE, HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. Public Present: Name Address Mark Foster 8020 Acorn Lane Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions from commissioners? Skubic: I have one question. Is the trail to the east of Stone Creek Drive, is there any connection on the development to the south for that trail? Generous: Well there's a proposed ridge or a culvert system that would be put in and then within Creekside there is a trail that continues down along the creek. Skubic: So the western side of it. Generous: Yes, that's correct. Skubic: So the eastern side and adjacent to the road, is there also a trail? Does that trail end at Bluff Creek there? Generous: No. It will follow the creek down, so they'll converge where the two branches of the creek converge. Skubic: Okay. Thank you. Mancino: So it will actually cross the creek at that point? Generous: Yes. r r i ll Ll J 1 L Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 Mancino: Where the two converge? Generous: Yes. Mancino: How do you do that environmentally? Sensitively. Generous: With the pedestrian type bridge structure that actually goes up. I don't know if they've determined the final design yet of that crossing. Mancino: Okay. And is that something that we are asking the applicant to assure us that the design is a trail system and how the two converge together? Generous: I'm not sure on that. Todd Hoffman was working with the applicant. Mancino: We may want to add that as a condition so we're sure that is approved. Any other questions at this point? Peterson: How close are we to coming off the cul -de -sac to get to units 15, 16 and 17 as far as fire and safety? I mean it looks as though we haven't got a real good turn around there. Generous: The Fire Marshal didn't have a problem with that little driveway area. Peterson: That's surprising. I mean normally we have that issue, don't we? As far as. Generous: Well if it's a long back up for them, he didn't feel that that was a problem right there. Peterson: That's all I've got. Mancino: Okay. Bob, will you please explain for me the conditional use permit for excavating and filling within a flood plain, where in your report you have staff is unclear on how the applicant can alter the flood plain. If we are unclear, then why would we be okay with conditional use permit for it? Generous: Well it's a little confusing on how it's defined. I believe Mr. Ken Adolf with Schoell and Madson has a little better graphic there. Mancino: Okay, why don't we wait and once we open this up for you to come in front of us, if you could answer that question. That would be great. Thank you. I'll wait. My only other question Bob is, and staff is, we have some Livable Community goals as far as multi- family. And according to a document that the City Council has signed and mandated for the City to uphold, is that we are looking for the multi - family to come in. The majority of the projects, six units an acre or higher. Does this meet, and will this satisfy our Livable Communities density goal that we have? And if it does or doesn't. If it doesn't, let's say, will that put an onus on other areas? Aanenson: I'd be happy to respond. As you may or may not recall, during the Highway 5 corridor study ' one of the objections to re- evaluate some of the zoning and this was a property that we identified as kind of a transitional piece based on some of the surrounding uses. And we felt that this could be up zoned so we gave it from a low density to a medium density designation. This is some of the concern we had. This wasn't our first choice of product. This was the issue that we raised before when we had a medium density property designation and go on the lower end. This is just over 4 units an acre. We lost an opportunity that we'll have to pick up somewhere else. ' Mancino: So our medium density is 4 to 8? Aanenson: Correct. Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 Mancino: And where... four sides, the 4.3. Aanenson: So there is other zoning. There's other housing type products that could be employed. This certainly is the choice of the applicant's. There are other options. Mancino: Okay. So we could recommend upping the density so that we are meeting our density goal for the Livable Communities Act? Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: Okay. I just wanted to ask about that from a staff's position how you had looked at that. Thank you. Peterson: One last question actually I forgot to ask. Regarding, we've already addressed the need for additional parking on the west side of Building 25. It still looks as though, if we add two more there you've still only got seven parking spots for that whole development. Is there any other, can you put any more between 14 and 15 on the end of that lot? Because that whole section on that side doesn't seem to have any guest parking. I mean you've got a long walk from that perspective. Did you consider that at all? Generous: I didn't really consider that. That parking that they're providing exceeded the requirement. Peterson: It's just a matter of where it is versus where some of the units are so, and it's not going to be used. People on 16, 17 and 15 aren't going to use the one in the cul -de -sac. They're going to park on the street probably. Just adding to the safety issue probably. Mancino: Good question. Any other questions of staff? Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Please do so. John Dobbs: Good evening. My name is John Dobbs from Heritage Development. I believe we've gone through the requirements ... come a long ways from the time, from the first one. I have brought a bigger drawing of the elevation side, and that front as well as some materials. I was talking to Dave this morning ... but we were talking about doing some brick and... This would be the siding type. This would be the light, I mean it's vinyl siding. Try and keep the maintenance cost down. There will be brick on the foundation and then a shingle kind of a color and then the soffit. And then double pane on the windows. And I guess all and all I think it's come a long ways and we've done a pretty good job on, Todd Hoffman and I talked a couple times about the... I think to answer Craig's question earlier, there is a trail that stubs on Stone Creek and... I think Todd was talking about either putting a pedestrian bridge in to cross the creek... that was, where it would temporarily flood. If the creek came up so we didn't have to do a lot of construction. We're trying to do an overall construction project with the trails going from Coulter Boulevard all the way down to the culvert crossing underneath Stone Creek and south under Timberwood as one project so we're trying to get to that... And Ken has some, Ken Adolf from Schoell and Madsen has some graphics on the flood plain and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Mancino: John will every unit, the 25 units all have the same coloring? The same brick. I mean everything look. John Dobbs: Currently that is the way that it's oriented. There could be some diversity easily and the building wasn't ... to the colors as long as there was a universal scheme on each building that matched and made sense but they could definitely do some diversity in colors if that was a strong wish. Mancino: Thank you. Ken Adolf: Hopefully to clarify the issue of the flood plain. The flood plain prior to any grading having been done in the area in conjunction with the Creekside project to the south is the line shown in red. As part of the Creekside project there was a storm water basin excavated on the north side of Bluff Creek, and 1 1 Ll I' L! I Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 ' that actually resulted in the flood plain elevation moving farther north, or what's shown in blue. And then what's shown in gray would be the flood plain elevation with the construction of Stone Creek Drive and of ' the townhome development. So there's a fair amount of flood plain filling in conjunction with the Stone Creek Drive crossing. Some of that lost volume is being replaced with the excavation that's occurring in this are and actually in here on the original flood plain that's being excavated from the lower elevation. ' Mancino: Okay, thank you. Does the applicant have any other? John Dobbs: Just briefly. The only other comment I would make is about the density as a whole. As you can see from the graphic, as you know there's a good setback from Bluff Creek. Will this impacts two sides ' of this 7 acre site so there's 100 feet that is essentially... plus the flood plain and the right -of -way so out of the 7 acres, it's fairly. ' Mancino: It's small. John Dobbs: And also the times we've been ... make sense of the cost of financing. So that would be the ' only other comment. Mancino: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. May I have a motion to open the public hearing and a second please? hearing. The hearing was opened. Peterson moved, Farmakes seconded to open the public public Mancino: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on this particular item number? Please come forward. State your name, address. Mark Foster: Hello. My name is Mark Foster. I live at 8020 Acorn Lane in Timberwood. I just have a comment about the density. I realize the density is the lowest it would go for residential on a 7 acre parcel but it's, if I look at it, it's already... it seems. The density level. I live on the north side of Timberwood and my neighbor... on the northeast corner and our two lots together are about 8 acres, so we're going from two houses on 8 acres to a 7 acre parcel with 25 townhomes. My concern is the density and if the density can't ' be lowered for residential, I would prefer for the City to look at alternatives like commercial and... That's all I have. ' Mancino: Thank you very much. Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second? Peterson moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Thank you. Comments from commissioners. Jeff. Farmakes: This has been picked over pretty well. It's an improvement and I have a few things to add in the conditions. I'll leave it at that ... and that's it. ' Mancino: Okay. Bob. Skubic: I have no comments. I'm agreeable to what staff has prepared here. Mancino: Craig. Peterson: Just the only comments relative to I do believe that I feel very strongly that the color of the ' buildings and the texture do have some variety to them versus one succinct color throughout the whole development, and Jeff that's maybe one of your conditions. I would like to see staff try to get parking scattered in there a little bit better, if it's all possible to look at it again. Those are really my only two issues as far as overall, I think it's a good plan for what the space they have available. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 Mancino: Okay, thank you. I also agree with the architectural concerns. Having a variety. The only other concern that I have, or two others. One I already brought up tonight, is the landscaping on the east side. And that is that I would just like the applicant and staff to review that on the east side, as you cross the creek, what we have east of the creek is office and industrial and I didn't see for those townhomes, for 11 through 17, I didn't see too much buffering... they will have an office industrial so I would just like to see that revisited and have the landscaping enhanced on the eastern side. Audience: Could you speak up? Mancino: Oh, I'm sorry. I would just like to see the landscaping enhanced on the east side of the plat and that is mostly because they will be facing those townhomes. The backs of them, which are lovely, they'll be facing industrial office and I have a concern that there isn't enough vegetation buffering that so. I still have a concern. I think the townhomes are quite nice. Quite lovely. And I think that the applicant, I'm sorry I was not here at the last public hearing for this when it was tabled and I think that there has been a lot of work between the applicant and staff. I do have concerns that we are not following the mandate from our City Council for the Livable Communities Act and making sure that we keep our densities where they should be so I have a very big concern with that. May I have a motion? Farmakes: I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres rezoning of the property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots and the associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhomes units and a conditional use permit for the excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside, subject to the following conditions listed on the staff report dated 8 -7 -96. I'm going to go down the list because this has been modified somewhat. 1 through 3 deleted. 4 as is. 5 as is. 6 deleted. 7, 8 as is. 9 would be revised to read, the storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 10 through 21 as is. 22 deleted. 23 modified to delete the second, or rather the first sentence, the center of. That should read, all structures shall be set, or excuse me. Yes, all structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the project boundaries which are adjacent to Bluff Creek and it's tributaries. 24 deleted. 25 modified to read, Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with city standards, i.e. standard boulevards. 26 deleted. 27 as is. 28 should be modified to read, if the applicant installs the trunk sanitary sewer, they shall be compensated by means of credits against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8 inch lateral line and the 18 inch trunk sewer line. 29 should be modified to read, Street A shall be constructed as a private street with a 26 foot wide street section. 30 deleted. 31 deleted. 32, 33, as is. 34 deleted. 35 as is. 36 modified to read, if parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking only on one side of the street. No parking fire lane signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #06- 1991. 37 through 40 as is. And 41 in addition, staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units. 42. The staff will review the parking issue. And 43. Landscaping shall be enhanced on the east side to improve buffering. Mancino: Is there a second? Peterson: Second. Mancino: May I make a friendly amendment that we add 44. That the applicant shall submit for approval a foundation planting plan for each of the units. Would you agree? Farmakes: That's fine. Mancino: Okay. And is that seconded also? Peterson: Yes. 1 L I Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 Mancino: Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Farmakes moved, Peterson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres rezoning of the property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD- R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots and the associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhomes units and a conditional use permit for the excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will be responsible for applying for and obtaining changes to the FEMA flood plain maps to reflect developed conditions. The applicant shall further define, graphically, the proposed floodplain boundary and provide justification for the changes. 2. The applicant shall notify and obtain a permit from the Bluff Creek Watershed district as needed for the activities of altering a flood plain and discharging storm pond runoff into the Bluff Creek. The city shall review comments from the Bluff Creek Watershed District before final plat approval. 3. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. ' 4. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements over all utilities, wetlands and ponding areas outside the right -of -way. Consideration should also be given for access for ' maintenance of the storm sewer lines as well as pending areas and wetlands. 5. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 6. Water quality fees will b based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived. Water quantity fees will b based in accordance with the City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans. 7. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 8. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the ' City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. 9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed predeveloped and post - developed storm water calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10 year storm event between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. financial 10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, and Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 MnDot, and comply with their conditions of approval. 12. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the lot. 13. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right -of -way areas. 14. The lowest flood elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of two (2) feet above the high water level calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines. 15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc - mulched or wood -fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 16. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures such as rock construction entrances may be incorporated on the final construction plans. 17. A buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet shall be maintained adjacent to ag /urban wetlands. The principal structure setback shall be 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. 18. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the project boundaries which are adjacent to Bluff Creek and it's tributaries. 19. Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City street standards, i.e. standard boulevards. 20. The storm sewer system shall be redesigned to limit discharge points to one on Stone Creek Drive. 21. If the applicant installs the trunk sanitary sewer, they shall be compensated by means of credits against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8 inch lateral line and the 18 inch trunk sewer line. 22. Street A shall be constructed as a private street with a 26 foot wide street section. 23. The developers and designers should meet with the building official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. 24. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 25. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. 26. If parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking only on one side of the street. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #06 -1991. 27. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9 -1. 1 n Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 1996 28. Land within the 50 foot creek setback will be dedicated public property. 29. Heritage Development will construct Trail "A" and Connector "A" within the 50 foot setback. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with these trails. Heritage will also be granted park fee credit for the linear area required for these trails based on a calculations of length times 20 feet in width. The proposed plat, at 25 multi - family units generates a land dedication requirement of two- thirds of an acre. 30. Heritage Development will also construct Trail Extension `B" within the right -of -way of Stone Creek Drive. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with this trail. The staking of these trails are to be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to construction. These improvements are to be bid as a unit of the larger public improvement projects being sponsored by the applicant as a part of this site work. Upon certification by the city of a low bidder for the trail components, said work shall be completed. Upon completion and acceptance of trail components, the applicant shall be reimbursed for engineering and construction costs associated with the trails utilizing trail acquisition and development funds. 31. Staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units. 32. The staff will review the parking issue. 33. Landscaping shall be enhanced on the east side to improve buffering. 34. The applicant shall submit for approval a foundation planting plan for each of the units. All voted in favor, except Mancino who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. Mancino: I will be the one nay vote and I would just like, the reason for the nay vote is I would like the City Council to look at it and to decide whether it is something that they want to look at the density and the density goal with the Livable Communities Act. To highlight it for them. Thank you. This will be on the City Council agenda. Generous: August 26` ". Mancino: August 26 "'. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 30 X 44 CANOPY OVER THE EXISTING GAS PUMPS AND A SIX (6) FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 25' FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ON PROPERTY ZONED BH HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED AT 7910 DAKOTA AVENUE, SINCLAIR STATION. Public Present: Name Address Larry Feldsein 6602 Portland Avenue, Richfield 1 15 F INFILL SITE TURNS ITS BACK ON CONVENTION • r ingle- family Observatory Green, a garages can be accessed Houses on an infill site in Denver detached density at prototype for infill devel- from the surrounding use surrounding streets and alleys 15 du/acre may opment within the exist- streets and alleys. to reach the rear - oriented seem like a concept ing grid of Denver's The color scheme for garages. The end units are 10 feet' only for certain streets and alleys. all the single - family from the street; other units are the areas of the Sun Eliminating streets on detached units is similar same distance from the property Belt. Where else the site enables density to the approach used for line. The houses are 22 feet would such high to be pushed to 15 units a multifamily building. wide, 50 feet deep. ' density for detached per acre. In site locations Colors used on all roofs, houses be necessary? with streets, Kephart siding and trim are con- with more amenities How about for infill says the density could be sistent. than comparable older sites in older sections of about 12 du/acre. "The idea is to make houses in the area. At ' mature metro areas like The 10 houses at one good, strong unified sales prices of $160,000 Denver? Observatory Green are impact," says Kephart. to $200,000, the homes Kephart Architects of oriented inward with The houses, built by cost about the same as Denver has used such front porches facing a Johnstown Design of existing for -sale high- density detached common pedestrian Denver, are 1400 to 1460 homes in the houses in designing court. Rear oriented square feet, bigger and neighborhood. CT e k A l t. e � F/ yy T ff . r I rnnrir� rrrrrr. A R'PVC�SI�,� 3 N�' �+ �+...�. 1 ', : ° c °'•E '��b - �L.�... I. n vF. • -.3m - Reprinted from PROFESSIONAL BUILDER August, 1994 0 1994 by Cahners Publishing Company r � r � 1 I. f I ' 1 LL Lcrf' HOME Iry IMT[K 4TV10Y NEI(�Ie; HOMES MVAZY i5 A414 I EVE0 i T - Hgo"H ads AWM: Small lot homes are less private! • l • • :7 7 Privacy in small lot designs may actually be superior to that for homes on larger lots, particularly when the large lot designs are based on the erroneous assumption that privacy Rill simply occur. Central to any sell lot concept is the planning for privaW. - Mr: SINGLE FAMILY HOME oN A LOGE LOT * 1°Wrz-IEVIEFD f pESIGNED IN, I 60LAY104 fw�M dry hIEI6�0mzp pNv 114E CC;MMUN RY AT LAIz&E There is a conceptual difference between large lot and small lot design. The home on a large lot is designed as if it had no neighbors. Page 1 �° • 7000 it MALZ ; r_77 When Is A Lot Small? In western cities, small (4000 to 5000 sq. ft.) lots are written into planning and subdivision regulations, and we experience little trouble developing lots this size. The same small lot would shock the sensibilities of many midwestern communities and chances of approval are greatly reduced. /TS A 4L Small is Relativel There is always room for change in any region. We've developed lots as small as 3750 sq. ft° in suburban Chicago. The trick is to choose your time and your place very carefully and describe your concepts clearly. t' - 00 low- OA WILY �. Gu l- sic- �w c••• - ` %. _ _ "Cluster Homes" means many thingsl Clustering can group building sites to save natural features or to increase density in urban locations. A cul -de -sac can be a `cluster" to soiree, while to others "clusters" are attached homes. The word "cluster" has regional variations in meaning, so care should be taken when using such loosely defined terms. *11'i►r.p SeRVe VRAL. aURe_6P. ° MYTH: Small lots or clusters are merely ways to staff more homes on less land® Clustering can: save natural features; provide neighborhood identity, and provide privacy as well as increase density. 0 d KOpf11f t kdit* k C. ©1994 Page 2 1 J I F lap 4y t�1.lNk�OM�S CotJG�MINIUMh J��R�VAL � IKUNlGlpr+L!(1�'� �MMthlGe�lS ' �rlXGcrif�C�i • 7L'F!N*R/PS V4 T/mE Myth: Single family Municipalities understand town - detached homes are always houses and are perfectly comfortable more acceptable than with the higher densities in town - attached homes. house developments. The negative focus on small lot single family is on To buyers, probably -- but to city the small lot. It may not be logical officials and neighborhood groups, or understandable, but it's a fact. almost never. One basic principal to follow is to Boring developments built in the past are often cited as the reasons neighborhood groups and city officials have such resistance to small lot concepts. These negative attitudes , are rooted in the more basic percep- tions of "What a single family home should be." Homes should: • Be separated from neighbors • Be individual in style • . • Be distinctly different from townhouses or other multi - family forms • Have large yards, big setbacks, wide elevations, etc. etc. i • Be like my parents' home immediately dispense with the term small lot. Concentrate on how your concept works. Show homes, not lot lines, and talk about how you achieve privacy. ELE yA 7 - leAl �ls Page 3 f'Z-AN PE" Ifr? HOW MAW �oME51TL' -5? w � E • Er aN Ds h • �'� -7= I =7K -, • Fri= 1•�1> =N�'� . � a o P°`°P`"''Y t • DETENTION•: u ' • : /.�; •SIZE Q ;� • �ETl3�k� '': •• / ETL*.NDS AW I T101JI.L 'r3�+' DEDI CATION I FOR 4TREET , Have you ever worked with a perfect site? It wouldn't have an odd shape, easements, wetlands, or any of the other constraints found on most pieces of land. ROW 9MVICA"noN Cit aDDITIa4AL. yETbACKS AT t4%-16R STREET W 4910 1 N �1�• I teA' � 4 1 S Q L " 2 t 1 +. 1$. 12 a • 10 0 7 I � I F��Catil � I t I NEFFIr-IENT 5R'E 4W.AIFE r 5 *31A 6 A E REQu1f�E� f.TDRMW I.TEll ! --'1.T 14 Lars oN 44Ac. _ 1$.5 Hoa W -A— ( 66,% EFFICIEN 'POFECT Puspi I developed the "Perfect Density Test" in order to analyze the poten- tial density of planning concepts independent of the constraints of a particular site. Judgements on the validity of concepts can be made quickly without designing an entire site. Actual density is typically 20% to 30% less than a perfect density depending on the peculiarities of a site, such as its size, shape, and required public dedications or easements. 7 n I Page 4 1 14 LOT. ON T ( OZ -- - = 5.3 wamr6 /0w ti' •� 1 REQu1f�E� f.TDRMW I.TEll ! --'1.T 14 Lars oN 44Ac. _ 1$.5 Hoa W -A— ( 66,% EFFICIEN 'POFECT Puspi I developed the "Perfect Density Test" in order to analyze the poten- tial density of planning concepts independent of the constraints of a particular site. Judgements on the validity of concepts can be made quickly without designing an entire site. Actual density is typically 20% to 30% less than a perfect density depending on the peculiarities of a site, such as its size, shape, and required public dedications or easements. 7 n I Page 4 1 r L J J ' NoTE� F{oJSES, oP�J . low V U f�'f�R�' � T ceNslTl') Actual density will typically he 70 to 80% of perfect density. Ground Coverage - Up to seven homes per acre (perfect density). Open space decreases with greater density, as the ground coverage of homes and streets increases. The switch to narrow lots increases open space, and using private streets and clusters continues this pattern. MYTH: Unlimoted Density Possibilities ty The potential density with this house type and size (50'x 30' - 2200 sq. ft.) is limited. Density cannot go over 10 to 11 per acre (perfect density) unless gimmicks, such as eliminating streets from the site area, are used, or trade- offs such as reducing house sizes are incorporated. Gross DensitX - Uses the total site area, including all streets. Net Density - Takes streets out of the calculation of land area and falsely increases density. I Page 5 /D a a 1 5 0' 11qE ° <G6T�s ° cf Pe�4rjPITY (7yApE 6W5) i I r AL� GEYrRDr K*RDW _ DMY MVATE No PME *YS Y6. WIDE D �Jc- FOR FARY4W5, The costs of density are measured in the trade -offs that may reduce the marketability of the final product. You can develop many more three - story, one -car garage small houses on a site than larger, one- or two - story homes, but if your market doesn't want them, it 's a wasted effort and a failure in the making. l♦IYTH: "It's still a single family detached home." At some point we cross the line with density, and the result is not perceived as single family, or at least the type of single family the market wants. Greater success could perhaps be achieved with more costly single family or even the right type of multi- family. Page 6 > I i I I i t - i I r AL� GEYrRDr K*RDW _ DMY MVATE No PME *YS Y6. WIDE D �Jc- FOR FARY4W5, The costs of density are measured in the trade -offs that may reduce the marketability of the final product. You can develop many more three - story, one -car garage small houses on a site than larger, one- or two - story homes, but if your market doesn't want them, it 's a wasted effort and a failure in the making. l♦IYTH: "It's still a single family detached home." At some point we cross the line with density, and the result is not perceived as single family, or at least the type of single family the market wants. Greater success could perhaps be achieved with more costly single family or even the right type of multi- family. Page 6 I 1coT I �°, _ P�/DL is STREET The Typical House used in this and following illustrations is 50' x 30', with a two -car garage. It has approximately 1000 sq, ft. of living space on the first floor, and could be as large as 2200 sq. ft. including a second floor within this footprint. STREET I Page 7 % OF 5/7E AREA . e .. 0 /(o . opal jpl4 ..741 3 91 1ACRE ' fZp aam • � Z�o 2.5 aGTU�IG a�vs�rr� Driveways are included in "open space," and the "street" area includes the entire right -of -way width for public streets. % OF S ?F AREA • 5�ree4 ... /7Y • !!owes ... M 0 1mo • 677, 4.3 1A&RE ' Houses are the smallest element of ground coverage, typical of all large lots. (v0' #50 R L 7�0° c.oT e o I - PU BL �c sre�� i.a� a • o �- s. - •� O. .5/ re ARV • 57�eef ... /890 • f1 ovSes ... 16 • OPT .. 6y'r 5 -31AcP,=--- P=RPeCr PFNI/77' (�6 -6 #1A c., Ac ,7VAL - The 60' x 110' lot is the smallest of my large lot examples. Predictably, while density increases open space declines, and houses and streets take up more and more of the land area. 6 /o 01 0 .5175 ARZA • 110v5es ... 25% • Own S�rce .. 53� 7 e6/AQQff ( 5.6 t1GMAI-) Narrow and Deep Lots are a powerful high density technique. Narrow lots reduce the area of street per lot, leaving extra room for more lots. The difference is in the product! Narrow and deep homes are not always accepted in a market, or need to be introduced carefully and at the right price, Page 8 I L 9! /2F 5/""W AAA& • O*e 7 ... /2 0 •AdVsc5 ... 299: • Of Spgcc 1•= c . G U L ^ TA, '5 Private Roads can increase density with no loss in open space. As density goes up the homes cover more of the site, but the reduction in street area compensates for the loss and open space can actually increase. Setbacks from private roads can often be less than from public roads, and are measured from the curbs rather than from a right -of -way line. /y5 a PR/V.A 9 49A DO A homeowner's association is necessary to maintain the street and is an important consideration before making this move. Buyers resent paying to care for their roads while their taxes go to the maintenance of roads in neighboring subdivisions. % OF SITS 1AR • HvvtieS ... 32,°� • o1 . . 9e 51�A 67< 6 Clusters /Courtyards - Less street per house, plus the absence of driveway parking spaces, increases density while maintaining open space. Care must be taken to insure clear separations between clusters (a common error in courtyard planning). Page 9 • ,y • • iL._f 1 A homeowner's association is necessary to maintain the street and is an important consideration before making this move. Buyers resent paying to care for their roads while their taxes go to the maintenance of roads in neighboring subdivisions. % OF SITS 1AR • HvvtieS ... 32,°� • o1 . . 9e 51�A 67< 6 Clusters /Courtyards - Less street per house, plus the absence of driveway parking spaces, increases density while maintaining open space. Care must be taken to insure clear separations between clusters (a common error in courtyard planning). Page 9 r •o �• o v . 0 EX MP7 STREET ro i s• e 14 5 044. s� F.- �vsTi�YG STi�E�T ° ,MYTH: Unbelievably High Densities Streets are already in place or are not counted as part of the land area. Note: See cover page for illustrations of this development. 7YPAI-IAC 25 R - 4 . Iv. 11, �PRI ) Calculating site area from centerline of street to centerline of street results in less density (units per acre), but it's unrealistic not to include streets except for urban infill locations where streets are in place. Page 10 TYPES OF SMALL LOTS ALTERNATE WIDTH LOTS ATRIUM HOMES Homes are oriented alternately. Wide, narrow, wide, narrow, along the street for variety in the .�. streetscape. This may require two separate 1 groups of plans for each type of lot. (See Keyhole lots.) Private yard space is contained within the confines of the home. Greater privacy is achieved at the expense of distances between homes. BOUTIQUE LOTS Traditional small lots on public streets. They are generally more narrow than deep, and are traditional in that they have room for small front and rear yards. Any closely knit grouping of lots and homes (See page 2). I CLUSTERS 7 COURTYARDS Private driveways are combined into a common paved auto court that serves as a combination of automobile access, front yard, and pedestrian walkway. FAN LOTS A specific type of cluster plan that mimics a traditional cul-de -sac. The zig -zag shape of the homes allows for a tighter, more compact grouping and higher density. (See page 1.) FLAG LOTS Lots behind other lots, with limited exposure to the street. They can be prime locations when located on amenities such as open space or lakes, or they can simply be the least expensive locations. KEYHOLE LOTS Keyholes are an outgrowth of the Zipper lot idea (see below) and address how to deal with the site perimeters. The sharing of rear yard open space is common with Keyhole and Zipper lots. I Page 11 I I I I �i � Yr i � WEI NARROW LOTS Simply put, these lots are wider than they are deep. Exaggerations of the concept can be as narrow as the one -car (or no) garage and the minimum space permitted between homes. "NOT" LOTS Zane Yost introduced this concept for affordable homes. The lot itself is not as important as how the homes relate to their outdoor private spaces. r ODD LOTS Most lots in this concept are narrow and deep - • (Boutique lots) on public streets, but some are wide and shallow (odd lots). The same homes work on both configurations, but elevations, - entries, etc., change depending on the lot shape. WIDE & SHALLOW Wider than deep small lots provide greater width I for homes to enhance the street scene and reduce the dominance of garage doors typical with narrow lots. The trade -off is a greater percentage of street per lot, increasing lot cost and reducing potential density. CL "Z" LOTS A very narrow lot concept that manages to provide good privacy, lots of light into the homes, and entries that are visible from the street. Tools used are "zero side yards," use easements, and an angled "Z" lot shape. F ZERO LOT LINES Any of several concepts that place one side of a • home on the property line to increase yard space on the opposite side. Use easements for this area facilitates the concept without the need for setback variances. ZIPPER LOTS Close design of homes and lots results in private rear yards on very small lots (4000 sq. ft. or less). Back -to -back homes share the large rear yard open space. Page 12 D.e lling Type isometric plot Plan ii R Q R �R RI ! l�Dt"PIFII• � R R �RR�RR�1 R R ' �I ■ ! IIR RR ' HHRR��R RR IR R R R 9R RR ��161 R ®► RRI1Rp R R f i R MOM- 1 ®® isometric IRRRRR►RRRRRR► t fs I t plot Plan RRRRR! RMRRRf RRRRR ®® Assumptions For Calculations Dwelling Unit No. of Lot Size Type Area Floors in 1200 in S.F. per Unit Ft. 1 1200 1 or 2 50 x 100 2 1200 1 or 2 30 x 100 3 1200 1 or 2 25 x 100 4 1200 1 50 x 100 5 1200 2 21 x 100 6 1200 1 60 x 100 7 1200 1 60 x 100 8 1200 2 30 x 65 g 1200 1 and 2 consolidated 10 1200 2 consolidated 11 800 1 consolidated 12 800 1 consolidated 13 800 2 consolidated 14 800 & 1 and 2 consolidated 1200 15 800 1 consolidated 16 800 1 consolidated Note: 10% circulation space added for dwelling types 11 through 16. Fig. 1 -12 Unit types, densities, and land use efficiency. at the high end. Increasing the density from 15 to 50 units per gross acre changes not only the nature of open spaces, but the amenities of the individual dwelling units. Changing from 80 to 200 does not change the living environ- ment drastically, but could produce changes in the quality of city life such as increased traffic and huge shadows, cast by 40 -story buildings. Unit Types The discussion to this point has centered around external aspects of the dwelling and the site plan's potential to emulate the single family lot. The configuration of the dwelling itself must also accommodate elements similar to the single family house if the living environment is to be satisfactory. The nature of the interior is the subject of another chapter, but certain aspects of the dwelling configuration relate to the aggregation on the site, density, and the method of access. These elements are extensively analyzed by Roger Sherwood. He limits the basic possible apartment configurations to three —the "single aspect," .. double aspect 90 degree" and the City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 10. Erosion control fence adjacent to wetlands shall be the City's Type III version. Rockfilter dikes shall be installed and maintained in the drainage swales until the site is revegetated. 11. Grading shall be prohibited within 10 feet of all wetlands. Erosion control fence shall be installed outside the 10 foot buffer except as indicated on the grading plans. 12. The Interim Use Permit earthwork fees shall be waived. 13. The grading should be revised as follows: a. All stormwater treatment basins shall be constructed with 4:1 side slopes or 3:1 with a 10:1 bench at the normal water level for the first one foot depth of water. b. The drainage culverts which are proposed to end at midslope need to be extended to discharge at the base of all slopes or at the normal water level in the ponding basins. c. Combine proposed drainage swales west of Parking Area No. I into one drainage Swale. d. Add a sediment basin west of Parking Area No. 1, upstream of the culvert crossing the drive aisle at approximately midpoint of Parking Area No. 1. e. Detailed drainage ponding calculations for a 10 and 100 year storm event (24 hour duration) shall be submitted to city staff for review and approval to confirm pond and culvert sizing. 14. That the applicant shall install a temporary sign at the entrance of the park for the general public's benefit providing the following information. a. The location of the construction area. b. The project completion time line. d. Hours of operation for the construction portion of the site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 7.03 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF COULTER BOULEVARD AND EAST OF STONE CREEK DRIVE EXTENSION; REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM A2 AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD -R; PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 25 LOTS, ONE OUTLOT, AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY; SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 25 TOWNHOME UNITS; AND _A_ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND FILLING WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN, TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE, HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. As you indicated, there's three actions for your approval tonight. One, the rezoning. Second, the conditional use to fill the flood plain and the third is the site plan review. The project is rather small in size and if you recall when we looked at the Highway 5 corridor study we felt that because it's isolated based on the new frontage road that's going in, Coulter and Stone Creek Drive, topographically it was an isolated piece that we felt that this may be an appropriate place to upgrade it from low density to medium density which gives a range of 4 to 8 units an acre. And we certainly hope that, staff did that this project would come in a little bit different configuration. The first time it came in before the Planning Commission, staff had recommended that it be tabled for changes because there was buildings shown located in the flood plain. The plan that the Planning Commission did recommend approval upon the second review does meet the staff's criteria, although the watershed district still needs to get review as well as the Federal Merchant Management, who 33 J City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 has jurisdiction. There was one ... on the project itself from the Planning Commission because they felt that really this site, there's a lot of different things that could have happened on the site as far as configuration or types of units that maybe a project that met more of the affordable or more intense development on this. It is, because of the flood plain, it does have some design constraints but certainly this type of unit, the way it's laid out, maximizes the footprint. We think that some other type of units. So there was one no vote from the Planning Commission who felt that some other type of units could have been placed on that that maybe could have met the affordable housing goals. And some of the other issues, there was, as you're aware, Council approved extension of Coulter. Right here is Stone Creek Drive and part of that is coming up to tie into Coulter. There will be a sidewalk along here and then also the trail along there. There will be a storm water pond on the south side, which is adjacent to Bluff Creek. As a part of this project we did look at how the Bluff Creek study that you'll be reviewing shortly, how the recommendations of that relate to this project and we believe that they are consistent with that. One of the issues that the Planning Commission also raised was architecture. The applicants here does have some samples but they wanted to see a little bit more variety and they had recommended that the staff work with the applicant to provide a little bit more variety in the types of...25 similar type units. That they work with the staff to provide some variety. With that the Planning Commission had recommended approval with the conditions in the report and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks Kate. Are there any questions? No questions? Is the applicant here and would you like to. Please state your name and your address. John Dobbs: Good evening. My name is John Dobbs with Heritage Development. As Kate mentioned we have spent a lot of time meeting with staff and ... the Planning Commission to try to work out constraints from the side at the Creekside ... this one has gone reasonably well. I think it is a difficult site. As Kate mentioned, it's small but there... setbacks from the center line... acres is actual usable and buildable... We tried to come up with a townhouse that is more affordable than the Creekside site. Certainly it is not based on Metropolitan Council's... affordable. Certainly it doesn't meet that criteria. However I think it's a good transition between the house types that are in Creekside subdivision... and industrial property on the west side of Coulter. I guess as Kate mentioned, we also, these were the original color schemes put together. Shingles, siding, soffit, window color. I did talk to the builder, which is MGM Construction by the way and has a model that is open for inspection in Creekside so he's going to be the builder. You can see the footprints in the staff report. They have, they're happy to try and come up with a couple three different color schemes. They expressed a desire to stay in the taupes and the earth tones... building color and type that wasn't all the same so it'd all be the same color. We reviewed the staff comments as well as the Planning Commission... I can answer any questions that anybody would have. Ken Adolf from Schoell and Madson is here also to answer wetland questions. Mayor Chmiel: What is the height on that structure? John Dobbs: How's that? Mayor Chmiel: To the top roof line. The height. John Dobbs: Well, this is the front. And I honestly don't know the answer to that question off the top of my head but I would guess it's somewhere around about 25 feet probably. Very similar to a single family home. This would be the back and then if there's a walkout, which... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Are there any specific questions? Councilwoman Dockendorf: What price range are we looking at there? John Dobbs: The builder believes they're going to come in somewhere in the neighborhood of $130,000.00 to $170,000.00, depending on the options... Square footage isn't really a true description because the ceilings are very vaulted. There's a lot of interior open space inside of the units themselves. So although the square footage is from 1,400 and 1,800 square feet respectively, there's a lot of interior space. It feels very open and it's probably a little bit more expensive to build than a standard 12 foot... WE City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Charles, how is a private street maintained? Is that the City's responsibility? Charles Folch: That's maintained by the private, it's either a homeowner or association of the property. Councilwoman Dockendorf And how will that be handled Mr. Dobbs? John Dobbs: There will be a homeowners association that will take care of not only landscaping but also the streets and the irrigation system and plantings. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just a related question if you will. I think you've got maybe four homes up in Creekside I" Addition. When do you expect final build out of that? John Dobbs: ... Well we have a number of them sold. It's just currently they're sold to a variety of folks.. ,my hope is it would be sold out somewhere towards the end of next year... Councilwoman Dockendorf: So being sold but not actually built by the end of next year so we're looking at maybe , 98? John Dobbs: Hopefully both. Hopefully sold and built... Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Mike. Councilman Mason: No, nothing. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: You aren't going to be the builder of this project? John Dobbs: No sir. Councilman Senn: Okay, and you aren't the builder in Creekside either, correct? John Dobbs: No, I'm the developer. There are going to be five builders in Creekside. Councilman Senn: In terms of staff s suggestion on the density tradeoff. John Dobbs: I'm sorry. Councilman Senn: The trade -off in terms of giving more density to the site which would lower the price point on the units. John Dobbs: Well for a variety of reasons I guess. It's a difficult site, as you can see. The overhead that Date had up earlier. It's fairly long and narrow. So the footprint has been an issue on the project or a number of different issues on how to do one that's wide and not as deep and vice versa, The unit type, because I'm not a builder... finding a partnership that I can work with as builder developer. Currently right now this is the builder in the site ... appears compatible... the site in and of itself. Given the fact that Stone Creek Drive and Coulter both are going to be paid for or assessed on some level on this very small development. There's some cost issues associated with that... Councilman Senn: Did you talk to approach any other builders who build a little bit more...price point is. 35 Ll City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 John Dobbs: We talked to Town & Country Homes about actually a bigger site than this one and we had talked to other builders and I've done other projects that were ... I'd be happy to try to find some ground that works. It seems like... Councilman Senn: I mean I'm just saying here, I mean here you have a city staff who in effect you know approached, suggested that you look at higher density and do that. I just, I'm not hearing. John Dobbs: I guess the two issues are, one it's market. It's a market issue. And the second one is, it's the cost to cover the cost of Stone Creek Drive and Coulter Boulevard as well as the streets that it takes to get internal. We're going to be building Stone Creek Drive all the way from the northern down to Creekside. This project has to finance that ... It's an expensive site. Councilman Senn: But I don't get the economics. John Dobbs: Lot price. The unit price is unfortunately directly related to how much... Councilman Senn: Well I understand it very well but I'm just saying, if you trade off density and you're talking about you know, leaving density here effectively with $130,000.00 to $170,000.00 price point, okay... John Dobbs: No, it's a double sided, double loaded kind of townhouse, more like the Rottlund kind of thing that you have ... on both sides and not accessed in the center. The site kind of lends itself to having one road. Looking off of both sides and then you have the expanse of the flood plain and... around a cul -de -sac so you end up ... smaller unit per se. You just get a smaller unit. That was what our ... but anyway when we found this partnership with a builder and... Councilman Senn: Have you built, now have you started building the houses across the way? John Dobbs: I'm sorry? Councilman Senn: Have you started construction on any of the house across the way? John Dobbs: In Creekside? Councilman Senn: Yeah. John Dobbs: There are four models up and there's a couple single family. Councilman Senn: But nothing up adjacent to this site? John Dobbs: No. That are unoccupied. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? Thank you. John Dobbs: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone wishing to address this proposal? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to Council. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess I don't have a lot of comments... dealt well in the conditions of approval. I can certainly appreciate the Chairman of the Planning Commission's comments on looking for areas. Particularly on small pieces like this which may lend themselves to more affordable units but I think there are some constraints with the land. And also given the consideration that that is guided for low density house, I think it's appropriate and I think this project works. 36 City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike. Councilman Mason: No comments. Mayor Chmiel: Mark. Councilman Senn: Well, this was one of the parcels we talked about earlier and like I say, I'm disappointed if we can't put ... an ideal parcel to push the density up and achieve what we do want to achieve in relationship to some of this affordable housing... only rationale in this is that. — higher price point in the houses built across the way... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Kate, have we heard anything back from Metropolitan Council in regard to affordable housing dollars? They had some discussion about raising those figures. Kate Aanenson: Right. They're still at $115. Mayor Chmicl: They're still at $115. Kate Aanenson: I called to check and I haven't heard ... I've heard that number thrown around but I called to verify It hasn't been approved. Mayor Chmiel: All right. Good. Is there a motion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd move approval of the project. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres rezoning of the property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots and the associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhomes units and a conditional use permit for the excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will be responsible for applying for and obtaining changes to the FEMA flood plain maps to reflect developed conditions. The applicant shall further define, graphically, the proposed floodplain boundary and provide justification for the changes. 2. The applicant shall notify and obtain a permit from the Bluff Creek Watershed district as needed for the activities of altering a flood plain and discharging storm pond runoff into the Bluff Creek. The city shall review comments from the Bluff Creek Watershed District before final plat approval. 3. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. 4. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements over all utilities, wetlands and ponding areas outside the right -of -way. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance of the storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands. 5. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 6. Water quality fees will b based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived. Water quantity fees will b based in accordance with the City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP 37 L� I P J City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans. 7. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 8. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. 9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed predeveloped and post- developed storm water calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10 year storm event between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, and MnDot, and comply with their conditions of approval. 12. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the lot. 13. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right -of -way areas. 14. The lowest flood elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of two (2) feet above the high water level calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines. 15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc - mulched or wood -fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 16. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures such as rock construction entrances may be incorporated on the final construction plans. 17. A buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet shall be maintained adjacent to ag /urban wetlands. The principal structure setback shall be 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. 18. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the project boundaries which are adjacent to Bluff Creek and it's tributaries. 19. Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City street standards, i.e. standard boulevards. 20. The storm sewer system shall be redesigned to limit discharge points to one on Stone Creek Drive. 21. If the applicant installs the trunk sanitary sewer, they shall be compensated by means of credits against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8 inch lateral line and the 18 inch trunk sewer City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 line. 22. Street A shall be constructed as a private street with a 26 foot wide street section. 23. The developers and designers should meet with the building official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. 24. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 25. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. 26. If parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking only on one side of the street. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #06 -1991. 27. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9 -1. 28. Land within the 50 foot creek setback will be dedicated public property. 29. Heritage Development will construct Trail "A" and Connector "A" within the 50 foot setback. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with these trails. Heritage will also be granted park fee credit for the linear area required for these trails based on a calculations of length times 20 feet in width. The proposed plat, at 25 multi - family units generates a land dedication requirement of two- thirds of an acre. 30. Heritage Development will also construct Trail Extension `B" within the right-of-way of Stone Creek Drive. Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with this trail. The staking of these trails are to be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to construction. These improvements are to be bid as a unit of the larger public improvement projects being sponsored by the applicant as a part of this site work. Upon certification by the city of a low bidder for the trail components, said work shall be completed. Upon completion and acceptance of trail components, the applicant shall be reimbursed for engineering and construction costs associated with the trails utilizing trail acquisition and development funds. 31. Staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units. 32. The staff will review the parking issue. 33. Landscaping shall be enhanced on the east side to improve buffering. 34. The applicant shall submit for approval a foundation planting plan for each of the units. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion failed with a vote of 3 to 1< Roger Knutson Mayor. This is a rezoning. It needs a 4/5 vote. Mayor Chmiel: Oh that's right. It needs a 4 /5` This will have to probably be carried over to the next Council meeting. 39 L 1 i I City Council Meeting - August 26, 1996 Roger Knutson: Right now the motion has failed. The only way it can come back is a motion to reconsider. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And a motion to reconsider has to come from? Roger Knutson: Someone on the failing side. Mayor Chmiel: From the three aye's. Councilwoman Dockendorf: No. Mayor Chmiel: Oh, I'm sorry. Don Ashworth: Or Councilman Berquist. Roger Knutson: Or Councilman Berquist, yes. Councilman Senn: Can anybody second it? Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Senn: I'll be happy to make a motion to reconsider. I think that it's only fair that Councilman Berquist be granted an opportunity to comment on this. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. What date would this be put back on Council agenda? Councilman Senn: Do you have the date here? Councilman Mason: 9th I believe. Mayor Chmiel: 9` Okay. Is everyone going to be here for that particular? Okay, yes. Kate Aanenson: You need a motion. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. John Dobbs: I have a quick question. Is it all of the motion ... that had to take place or was it just the rezoning? Kate Aanenson: Roger, just for a point of clarification, it was all posed in one motion. That's how the staff report read. Mayor Chmiel: There are three different items that are on there. Okay. Is there a second to that motion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to reconsider Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres rezoning of the property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots and the associated right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhomes units and a conditional use permit for the excavation and filling within the flood plain for the Townhomes at Creekside. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Eli]